PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[comix4fun]

How about we let Caira give him a beat down?

You need a beat down.

 

I can warm up on Greggy. all other contenders will pale by comparison.

[nocutename]

Personally, I prefer not to have any discussions with you as they go no where IMO. You are twisting my words. He admitted to not looking at the book when he paid for it. I am just saying how do you fork over that my money without looking at the item.

 

The argument here which you are avoiding is whether or not Sagat belongs on the probation list or HOS. I am stating no because this was not a board transaction and furthermore, the boards had no influence on the purchase. Should he prosecute, I would in light of the new information but again that is not a board decision.

 

 

I just quickly reread your original post in PG section. To me you purchased the book based on knowing him from high school. It appears to me that Sagat being a a board member here didn't play a part in the purchasing decision. Now two years later rather than have a warning thread in CG, you are requesting him to be placed on the list because he is a member here.

 

I can see making justifications on transactions that are done off the boards based on the trust of a member here. But I don't see that being the case here. I feel for you and I wish that you get every penny back. I am sure that Sagat's selling days are over here regardless if he is on the list or not.

 

Just a few weeks back purchased a book with an undisclosed color touch. It was terribly done and I didn't catch it in the dim lighting of the LCS. Luckily I looked at it in my car and the spot was very apparent. The fact remains, while it sucks, you should have inspected the book before forking over that much money.

 

 

 

I am seriously hoping you are joking here or that you didn't read Andy "October"'s post about how SAGAT knew that the book was restored, was told to his face it was restored and them stated he was selling it on ebay anyway.

 

People are not allowed to make false claims about their product in order to induce a transaction. There are several criminal statutes built around that concept.

 

Are you REALLY blaming the victim here? Really?

 

They are all members here, including the eye witnesses. Who gives a flying fig about WHY Twisty bought the book from him? The fraudulent description is the core issue here.

 

Because he didn't rely on knowing him from the boards before buying? Really? That's what you are standing on? That's more important than outright fraud?

 

How can you possibly blame Twisty when you have independent 3rd party testimony from an established and respected board member that SAGAT knew for a fact the book was restored and sold it as un-restored?

If you want to stick you head in the sand and ignore what SAGAT did to Twisty that is your choice. The rest of us seem to prefer knowing when something like this happens, protecting ourselves and protecting each other.

[comix4fun]

Personally, I prefer not to have any discussions with you as they go no where IMO. You are twisting my words. He admitted to not looking at the book when he paid for it. I am just saying how do you fork over that my money without looking at the item.

 

 

 

Personally, I would prefer the same because when someone says that the victim should have looked at the book closer in light of proof of clear intent to defraud it gives me a migraine.

 

PS. I quoted you directly. They are your words. If you don't like what they say take it up with the author.

[Count]

So where is SAGAT? I was hoping to get some cash to pay my electric bill...

[PovertyRow]

 

+1

 

I think intent is the correct answer, when Divad started this thread a long time ago, there were no votes, no specific language reviews, he started it as a warning system to allert people about potential pitfalls with buyers and sellers. That's what this is, a warning about a potential pitfall.

 

It's nice to have a central place to keep this information, starting more threads might make it harder to find for new people.

 

When Divad started the PL he actually was specific in addressing people who hit the and didn't follow through. From there, through discussion, the criteria has evolved. But an overriding criteria has been that these are board sales.

 

I agree it is nice to have a centralized place for this information. It is why I suggested a Third Tier for "Off-Board" transactions be added to the existing list.

 

To clarify, it would use the same list. Just a third heading specifying Off-Board Transactions. The current PL Discussion thread would be used to go over the situation, just as it is now. As I said in a previous post, since this involves Boardies, if the usual initial PM exchange does not bring results all parties can air their sides here, just as we are now doing.

 

The only change I am suggesting is that we now specifically include Off-Board transactions between Board members.

[comix4fun]

 

+1

 

I think intent is the correct answer, when Divad started this thread a long time ago, there were no votes, no specific language reviews, he started it as a warning system to allert people about potential pitfalls with buyers and sellers. That's what this is, a warning about a potential pitfall.

 

It's nice to have a central place to keep this information, starting more threads might make it harder to find for new people.

 

When Divad started the PL he actually was specific in addressing people who hit the and didn't follow through. From there, through discussion, the criteria has evolved. But an overriding criteria has been that these are board sales. That is why Robojo/Methuselah/Hammer is not on the list.

 

I agree it is nice to have a centralized place for this information. It is why I suggested a Third Tier for "Off-Board" transactions be added to the existing list.

 

To clarify, it would use the same list. Just a third heading specifying Off-Board Transactions. The current PL Discussion thread would be used to go over the situation, just as it is now. As I said in a previous post, since this involves Boardies, if the usual initial PM exchange does not bring results all parties can air their sides here, just as we are now doing.

 

The only change I am suggesting is that we now specifically include Off-Board transactions between Board members. I don't understand the resistance to the idea.

 

 

 

Adding language is a great idea. I have agreed with that since it came up, not because the language is entirely necessary, but because including it will prevent any distraction or diminishment from what has always been the central goal of the probation area as a whole, protection of the honest and forthright members of this forum.

 

While the original deal was not struck here, all those PM's containing lies about the restoration (from what we've been told) were, so there's some furtherance of the fraud going on right here on the boards.

 

Basically, since it's a forum member established list, and criteria, there's nothing to stop us from including the really heinous actions by altering the criteria when the need arises out of fairness.

 

As a byproduct of doing so we don't let our focus stray from the action that is probation worthy.

[seanfingh]

People keep using the word "semantics" in relation to the Probation List. I do not think "semantics" means what they think it means.

 

There are no semantics. The Probaiton List explicitly targets transactions completed in the Forum Only Selling Area. Where are the semantics there?

 

 

 

 

The "legislative intent" of the probation list is to inform forum members of other forum members failing to live up to their promises or transactions.

 

It is also there to warn and hopefully prevent other forum members from being pulled into a transaction, unwittingly, with the same problem forum member.

 

Being stuck on the exact words of how people are added to the probation list is to be mired in the semantics of what's written instead of embracing the broader goal and purpose of the list, why it was instituted, and why it is necessary.

 

When you have one forum member, ripped off by another forum member, and a third forum member can give 1st hand testimony that it is fraudulent in nature and they both come onto this forum to speak about it they have made it the forum's business, they have brought the transaction to this forum.

 

So semantics means exactly what I think it means.

 

The list exists to help and prevent problems and fraud. It doesn't exist to preserve its specific language or WORSE to let its language stand in the way of clear and obvious fraud and warning our members of the same in order to protect themselves.

 

Would the word minutia be more to everyone's liking, being that they are now stuck on the semantics of the word semantics?

 

Thank you Judge Posner. They must hand you his book when you pass the Illinois bar.

[mikenyc]

I agree that members should be forwarned about potential unscrupulous sellers, but where do you stop.

 

I would not like to do business with anyone who is in arrears with their child support, who speeds in a school zone, who have been convicted of a violent crime, etc....

 

This list should simply be for transactions that occur on the boards either in a thread on in a PM. There is to much ambiguity that arises from transactions in a Starbucks, or Craiglist, or other sites.

 

I don't see how this is still going on

[comix4fun]

People keep using the word "semantics" in relation to the Probation List. I do not think "semantics" means what they think it means.

 

There are no semantics. The Probaiton List explicitly targets transactions completed in the Forum Only Selling Area. Where are the semantics there?

 

 

 

 

The "legislative intent" of the probation list is to inform forum members of other forum members failing to live up to their promises or transactions.

 

It is also there to warn and hopefully prevent other forum members from being pulled into a transaction, unwittingly, with the same problem forum member.

 

Being stuck on the exact words of how people are added to the probation list is to be mired in the semantics of what's written instead of embracing the broader goal and purpose of the list, why it was instituted, and why it is necessary.

 

When you have one forum member, ripped off by another forum member, and a third forum member can give 1st hand testimony that it is fraudulent in nature and they both come onto this forum to speak about it they have made it the forum's business, they have brought the transaction to this forum.

 

So semantics means exactly what I think it means.

 

The list exists to help and prevent problems and fraud. It doesn't exist to preserve its specific language or WORSE to let its language stand in the way of clear and obvious fraud and warning our members of the same in order to protect themselves.

 

Would the word minutia be more to everyone's liking, being that they are now stuck on the semantics of the word semantics?

 

Thank you Judge Posner. They must hand you his book when you pass the Illinois bar.

 

 

There are 4 people here that got that joke....and I am one of them.

[PovertyRow]

Should the Probation List be expanded to include Off-Board transactions between Board Members? This would add an Off-Board section to the Probation List. Since this would be between Board Members, the Probation Discussion area would still b e used as it is now.

 

 

[comix4fun]

I agree that members should be forwarned about potential unscrupulous sellers, but where do you stop.

 

I would not like to do business with anyone who is in arrears with their child support, who speeds in a school zone, who have been convicted of a violent crime, etc....

 

This list should simply be for transactions that occur on the boards either in a thread on in a PM. There is to much ambiguity that arises from transactions in a Starbucks, or Craiglist, or other sites.

 

I don't see how this is still going on

 

 

Well if one forum member was behind on their child support payments to another forum member and had to pay them with a $1200 unrestored copy of Avengers #1 and they paid with a restored copy worth $400 and then PM'd back and forth on this forum lying about what they knew, then you'd have a pretty good reason to add them.

 

 

 

[Count]

I votes yes.

 

"Off-Board transactions between Board Members"

[Bosco685]

So where is SAGAT? I was hoping to get some cash to pay my electric bill...

 

[OldGuy]

Not everyone can be warned. As a matter of fact there are folks that will refuse to be warned. At some point you have to let people start taking responsibility for themselves.

 

There are collectors that will spend thousands of dollars on a robojo33 (and comickeys before that) auction but will not take the time to google that eBay ID. Some folks just insist on being stupid.

 

It took me a while to come to the conclusion that most scammers are complimented by willing (to one degree or another) victims. The search for, and subsequent find of a "good deal" tends to blind some people to what is blatantly obvious to others.

 

The fact that these boards even has a probation list and HOS should be more than enough to indicate there is a need to proceed with caution.

 

While it's true that "A fool and his money are soon parted.", it is also true that it's almost imposible to warn a determined fool.

 

Stop trying to be all things to everyone and let people make the mistakes they insist on making.

[comix4fun]

Not everyone can be warned. As a matter of fact there are folks that will refuse to be warned. At some point you have to let people start taking responsibility for themselves.

 

There are collectors that will spend thousands of dollars on a robojo33 (and comickeys before that) auction but will not take the time to google that eBay ID. Some folks just insist on being stupid.

 

It took me a while to come to the conclusion that most scammers are complimented by willing (to one degree or another) victims. The search for, and subsequent find of a "good deal" tends to blind some people to what is blatantly obvious to others.

 

The fact that these boards even has a probation list and HOS should be more than enough to indicate there is a need to proceed with caution.

 

While it's true that "A fool and his money are soon parted.", it is also true that it's almost imposible to warn a determined fool.

 

Stop trying to be all things to everyone and let people make the mistakes they insist on making.

 

 

I am going to guess your school years resembled something like this...

 

 

 

In all seriousness, people may make mistakes based on a lack of information, and sometimes greed or folly. I don't know if that means we throw our hands up and turn a blind eye to a fraud brought directly to, and continued upon, our doorstep.

 

There are people that see the value in the HOS and probation list, and when a clear gap is discovered there's nothing wrong with closing it. I don't leave my keys in the ignition simply because I think a determined thief will steal the car anyway.

[Annihilus]

I votes yes.

 

"Off-Board transactions between Board Members"

 

This. Though I think a new section for off-board transactions is a little overkill. Leave the probie/HOS the way it is.

[PovertyRow]

Stop trying to be all things to everyone and let people make the mistakes they insist on making.

 

This is by no means "all things to everyone". It is still restricted to Board Members on both sides. The issue of on-board vs off-board has been around for some time. The idea of putting on the PL a Boardie with a bad off-board transaction to another Boardie keeps coming up. This is the most recent one.

 

I find it more objectionable to add them to the PL for an Off-Board transaction the way the PL is currently setup. Sometimes we hear of off-board shenanigans with the same Boardie being more careful with their on-board descriptions. They are likely more careful with their on-board descriptions because oif the PL.

[DiceX]

I votes yes.

 

"Off-Board transactions between Board Members"

 

+1

 

 

[mikenyc]

The more disconcerting issue, for me, is that there are well respected sellers who sell to probation list and HOS members. These are people who screwed over other members, on these boards, not in a fifth grade game of marbles, and were placed on the list. Yet for the almighty dollar these sellers will continue to do business with them, hoping I guess that they won't be the unfortunate one to be hurt.

 

That is pretty

[OldGuy]

I am going to guess your school years resembled something like this...

 

 

Not quite, but simply trying out didn't secure you a spot on the team either. I know that will come as a shock to some.

 

In all seriousness, people may make mistakes based on a lack of information, and sometimes greed or folly. I don't know if that means we throw our hands up and turn a blind eye to a fraud brought directly to, and continued upon, our doorstep.

 

I never suggested that. I'm simply saying that there is a limit to what can be done here. When do we stop making lists and simply suggest that people proceed with caution? I've continued to host the Comickeys and PGX websites I created because I think the information they provide may be helpful to someone that is interested in exercising due diligence. However, those websites are worthless to someone that isn't interested in being cautious. Did you know that I have received e-mail from folks that read my CK website and proceeded to do business with him anyway and got a restored book back from CGC!? True story. You just can't help some people.

 

There are people that see the value in the HOS and probation list,

 

And I am one of them. But talk of adding another list is just silly in my opinion.

 

and when a clear gap is discovered there's nothing wrong with closing it.

 

Agreed, unless it's complete overkill.

 

I don't leave my keys in the ignition simply because I think a determined thief will steal the car anyway.

 

Of course not, and that also has nothing to do with what I said. What I did say is that if you insist on leaving your keys in your car than there is nothing I can do to help you.