APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED - Thread has de-railed!!

[bababooey]

Lately people have been going off about boardies using the term "usual or regular" rules in their sales thread and not knowing the vague nature of what they are. Here is a sales thread that was very explicit as to the rules, and what happens the seller gets ripped to shreds.

 

Read the first post of the sales thread you are about to buy in. You never know what crazy thing the seller might have in there...

Great point.

[Jaydogrules]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

[mikenyc]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

What was cut and dry were the listing rules that said "First I'll take it in thread trumps ALL PM's". There is nothing vague about that.

 

-J.

 

The spirit of the rule was not meant for this circumstance and was boiler plate.

 

What if Mike had paid and I posted the in the thread before the thread was updated, would I have the ability to argue that the seller should be forced to sell me the book because I posted in the thread and the other business was conducted by PM?

 

 

 

 

What if? That's not what happened. There are infinite variables for what "could" happen. In this case and under these circumstances the proper buyer got the book. Dan had a firm price in mind, one buyer chose to haggle, one didn't and his I'll take it in the thread "trumped" what happened in ALL PM's. All prospective buyers were fairly warned that could happen. Dan did nothing wrong here.

 

-J.

 

Since you're so staunchly black and white you shouldn't categorize Mike's PM conversation as haggling since a) you have no knowledge of what they actually said and b) the dollar difference was $40 or $50 dollars on a several thousand dollar book. Sometimes people want a back cover scan or method of shipment or pay by check or any of the other thousand reasons to conduct business privately.

 

Ultimately, having everyone on the forum witness this debacle is probably not worth having that rule in your thread.

 

I see your point I really do. But again the subject of the PMs were rendered moot when roulette threw up the I'll take it in the thread. Dan's listing said that could happen so every prospective buyer went into it on a level playing field.

 

-J.

 

So the next step would be to look at the rule or those similar and ask yourself are they fair and should they be allowed if the rule gives the seller latitude, to in effect, not honor an agreed upon deal that took place by PM?

 

 

[kav]

Since Dan apologized, does it matter at all if he acted wrongly or rightly? If rightly no problem. If wrongly, he apologized.

End of story.

[Bomber-Bob]

I actually don't like it when my buyers post "I'll take it per PM" in the thread. It might give others the impression I'm discounting. I'll just mark the book sold. If someone posts the "take it" before I update, then I explain it sold via PM.

 

Actually, I always assume that an I'll Take It Per PM equates to a discount of some sort.

[bababooey]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

What was cut and dry were the listing rules that said "First I'll take it in thread trumps ALL PM's". There is nothing vague about that.

 

-J.

 

The spirit of the rule was not meant for this circumstance and was boiler plate.

 

What if Mike had paid and I posted the in the thread before the thread was updated, would I have the ability to argue that the seller should be forced to sell me the book because I posted in the thread and the other business was conducted by PM?

 

 

 

 

What if? That's not what happened. There are infinite variables for what "could" happen. In this case and under these circumstances the proper buyer got the book. Dan had a firm price in mind, one buyer chose to haggle, one didn't and his I'll take it in the thread "trumped" what happened in ALL PM's. All prospective buyers were fairly warned that could happen. Dan did nothing wrong here.

 

-J.

 

Since you're so staunchly black and white you shouldn't categorize Mike's PM conversation as haggling since a) you have no knowledge of what they actually said and b) the dollar difference was $40 or $50 dollars on a several thousand dollar book. Sometimes people want a back cover scan or method of shipment or pay by check or any of the other thousand reasons to conduct business privately.

 

Ultimately, having everyone on the forum witness this debacle is probably not worth having that rule in your thread.

 

I see your point I really do. But again the subject of the PMs were rendered moot when roulette threw up the I'll take it in the thread. Dan's listing said that could happen so every prospective buyer went into it on a level playing field.

 

-J.

 

So the next step would be to look at the rule or those similar and ask yourself are they fair and should they be allowed if the rule gives the seller latitude, to in effect, not honor an agreed upon deal that took place by PM?

 

Actually this "rule" gives the seller less latitude since he is putting himself at the mercy of what is publicly posted.

 

 

 

[mikenyc]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

What was cut and dry were the listing rules that said "First I'll take it in thread trumps ALL PM's". There is nothing vague about that.

 

-J.

 

The spirit of the rule was not meant for this circumstance and was boiler plate.

 

What if Mike had paid and I posted the in the thread before the thread was updated, would I have the ability to argue that the seller should be forced to sell me the book because I posted in the thread and the other business was conducted by PM?

 

 

 

 

What if? That's not what happened. There are infinite variables for what "could" happen. In this case and under these circumstances the proper buyer got the book. Dan had a firm price in mind, one buyer chose to haggle, one didn't and his I'll take it in the thread "trumped" what happened in ALL PM's. All prospective buyers were fairly warned that could happen. Dan did nothing wrong here.

 

-J.

 

Since you're so staunchly black and white you shouldn't categorize Mike's PM conversation as haggling since a) you have no knowledge of what they actually said and b) the dollar difference was $40 or $50 dollars on a several thousand dollar book. Sometimes people want a back cover scan or method of shipment or pay by check or any of the other thousand reasons to conduct business privately.

 

Ultimately, having everyone on the forum witness this debacle is probably not worth having that rule in your thread.

 

I see your point I really do. But again the subject of the PMs were rendered moot when roulette threw up the I'll take it in the thread. Dan's listing said that could happen so every prospective buyer went into it on a level playing field.

 

-J.

 

So the next step would be to look at the rule or those similar and ask yourself are they fair and should they be allowed if the rule gives the seller latitude, to in effect, not honor an agreed upon deal that took place by PM?

 

Actually this "rule" gives the seller less latitude since he is putting himself at the mercy of what is publicly posted.

 

 

 

Pop quiz:

 

What made Howard furious that Gary had in his newly remodeled home theater?

[MCMiles]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

[Jaydogrules]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

What was cut and dry were the listing rules that said "First I'll take it in thread trumps ALL PM's". There is nothing vague about that.

 

-J.

 

The spirit of the rule was not meant for this circumstance and was boiler plate.

 

What if Mike had paid and I posted the in the thread before the thread was updated, would I have the ability to argue that the seller should be forced to sell me the book because I posted in the thread and the other business was conducted by PM?

 

 

 

 

What if? That's not what happened. There are infinite variables for what "could" happen. In this case and under these circumstances the proper buyer got the book. Dan had a firm price in mind, one buyer chose to haggle, one didn't and his I'll take it in the thread "trumped" what happened in ALL PM's. All prospective buyers were fairly warned that could happen. Dan did nothing wrong here.

 

-J.

 

Since you're so staunchly black and white you shouldn't categorize Mike's PM conversation as haggling since a) you have no knowledge of what they actually said and b) the dollar difference was $40 or $50 dollars on a several thousand dollar book. Sometimes people want a back cover scan or method of shipment or pay by check or any of the other thousand reasons to conduct business privately.

 

Ultimately, having everyone on the forum witness this debacle is probably not worth having that rule in your thread.

 

I see your point I really do. But again the subject of the PMs were rendered moot when roulette threw up the I'll take it in the thread. Dan's listing said that could happen so every prospective buyer went into it on a level playing field.

 

-J.

 

So the next step would be to look at the rule or those similar and ask yourself are they fair and should they be allowed if the rule gives the seller latitude, to in effect, not honor an agreed upon deal that took place by PM?

 

 

Again I agree with you. But by the same token a buyer has the right to pass on the book if he doesn't like the listing terms. Or he can just throw up the sign if he sees a good deal on a book he really wants and be done with it. Remember Dan did say his price was firm and he specifically discouraged attempts to haggle. One buyer pulled the trigger another started sending PM s, even though Dan said basically "hey guys any PMs that get sent will be negated if I get a full price buyer that accepts all my terms as is".

 

If a prospective buyer doesn't like that he has a chance of losing on the book even if he has a protracted negotiation then he should either just post the I'll take it in the thread, or pass on the book.

 

-J.

[MCMiles]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

What was cut and dry were the listing rules that said "First I'll take it in thread trumps ALL PM's". There is nothing vague about that.

 

-J.

 

The spirit of the rule was not meant for this circumstance and was boiler plate.

 

What if Mike had paid and I posted the in the thread before the thread was updated, would I have the ability to argue that the seller should be forced to sell me the book because I posted in the thread and the other business was conducted by PM?

 

 

 

 

What if? That's not what happened. There are infinite variables for what "could" happen. In this case and under these circumstances the proper buyer got the book. Dan had a firm price in mind, one buyer chose to haggle, one didn't and his I'll take it in the thread "trumped" what happened in ALL PM's. All prospective buyers were fairly warned that could happen. Dan did nothing wrong here.

 

-J.

 

Since you're so staunchly black and white you shouldn't categorize Mike's PM conversation as haggling since a) you have no knowledge of what they actually said and b) the dollar difference was $40 or $50 dollars on a several thousand dollar book. Sometimes people want a back cover scan or method of shipment or pay by check or any of the other thousand reasons to conduct business privately.

 

Ultimately, having everyone on the forum witness this debacle is probably not worth having that rule in your thread.

 

I see your point I really do. But again the subject of the PMs were rendered moot when roulette threw up the I'll take it in the thread. Dan's listing said that could happen so every prospective buyer went into it on a level playing field.

 

-J.

 

So the next step would be to look at the rule or those similar and ask yourself are they fair and should they be allowed if the rule gives the seller latitude, to in effect, not honor an agreed upon deal that took place by PM?

 

Actually this "rule" gives the seller less latitude since he is putting himself at the mercy of what is publicly posted.

 

 

The mercy of a full price I'll take it? Oh drat!

[Jaydogrules]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

 

Yes I think it was a good rule because I understand the intent of it: Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably. If a buyer doesn't like the rules of the listing he can say screw this guy and his book and move on. Dan knew he had a hot book with a nice grade and he was "firm" in his price. He warned everyone an unqualified I'll take it in the thread would take the book over "ALL PMs". He is not screwing over anybody by following the rules he set out in the very beginning. Are u suggesting that he should have "changed" his own publicly posted rules and burned roulette, the guy who actually followed the rules ? That just makes no sense.

 

 

-J.

[Jonesin4Comics]

I just want to know if Transplant accepted the apology? :shrug:

[universal soldier]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

 

 

Yes I think it was a good rule because I understand the intent of it: Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably. If a buyer doesn't like the rules of the listing he can say s few this guy and his book and move on. Dan knew he had a hot book with a nice grade and he was "firm" in his price. He warned everyone an unqualified I'll take it in the thread would take the book over "ALL PMs". He is not screwing over anybody by following the rules he set out in the very beginning. Are u suggesting that he should have "changed" his own publicly posted rules and burned roulette, the guy who actually followed the rules ? That just makes no sense.

 

 

-J.

 

That's your interpretation of his intent. I don't think he ever said his price was firm or wasn't willing to haggle.

[MCMiles]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

 

 

Yes I think it was a good rule because I understand the intent of it: Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably. If a buyer doesn't like the rules of the listing he can say s few this guy and his book and move on. Dan knew he had a hot book with a nice grade and he was "firm" in his price. He warned everyone an unqualified I'll take it in the thread would take the book over "ALL PMs". He is not screwing over anybody by following the rules he set out in the very beginning. Are u suggesting that he should have "changed" his own publicly posted rules and burned roulette, the guy who actually followed the rules ? That just makes no sense.

 

 

-J.

 

Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably.

 

As you like to say. That's not what happened. Dan entered into negotiations and even settled on a deal. So did Dan follow his own rules?

 

It is good to know you think it is a good rule. (thumbs u

 

 

[Park]

Since this abomination is still going on here's a simple question:

 

Who posted the first, Mike in PM or the buyer in the thread?

 

If the buyer in the thread posted first by time stamp then it's his book. If Mike posted first in PM it should be his book.

 

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

 

I don't know either Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Timestamp "wins".

 

It should be this simple.

 

Hell the whole "rules" thing could be this simple.

 

Time stamp wins.

 

Easy.

 

To prevent the what ifs: Timestamp, without conditions, wins.

 

Cue 14 pages defining "conditions" and 12 more defining "without".

[Jaydogrules]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

 

 

Yes I think it was a good rule because I understand the intent of it: Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably. If a buyer doesn't like the rules of the listing he can say s few this guy and his book and move on. Dan knew he had a hot book with a nice grade and he was "firm" in his price. He warned everyone an unqualified I'll take it in the thread would take the book over "ALL PMs". He is not screwing over anybody by following the rules he set out in the very beginning. Are u suggesting that he should have "changed" his own publicly posted rules and burned roulette, the guy who actually followed the rules ? That just makes no sense.

 

 

-J.

 

Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably.

 

As you like to say. That's not what happened. Dan entered into negotiations and even settled on a deal. So did Dan follow his own rules?

 

It is good to know you think it is a good rule. (thumbs u

 

 

Of course he did. He sold the book to the first "I'll take it" in the thread. Done and done.

 

-J.

[kav]

-So, we're done?

[Jaydogrules]

Just to play devil's advocate. Why did the PM buyer bother to post I'll take it in the thread if he thought it was a done deal already?

 

 

 

 

Finally!

 

Either was too busy to post it immediately (something like boarding a plane) and posted without even updating the thread, or (more likely) he did see the post in the PM and was letting that poster know "sorry I already took it".

 

Either way, I guarantee he thought a deal was deal. Like most of us do.

 

 

So....He had time to do all the back and forth PM ing but couldn't take another two seconds to post the I'll take it in the thread? But he found the time a few minutes after roulette did? Come on. The first prospective buyer needs to have some accountability for not adhering to the explicit terms of the listing. He unfortunately realized a bit too late his oversight.

 

-J.

. This could have played out in three seconds. Second One: Dan agrees to deal. Second two: roulette post I'll take it. Second three: Transplant post in thread(which would have been pretty damn fast.

 

Still Tranny's fault? I guess so because it's a stupid rule.

 

But that's "not" what happened. There are infinite variables here, but based on what "actually" happened roulette is the proper buyer. The first buyer did not post the I'll take it in the thread until several minutes after roulette did. He did not consummate the deal. Roulette did site Un seen so to speak. The earlier bird got the worm. How is this not a fair outcome ?

 

 

-J.

I disagree. A deal was consummated. But whatever...

 

Good lord, man we get it. The rule is black and white to you even if it screws people over. The point is: the rule is stupid and people should quit using it. As you said, there are a lot if variables, all of which could cause problems. It also would open the door to sellers directly screwing over people because they didn't post fast enough.

 

We get you don't think Dan did anything wrong. Most don't. I don't, but I would have given the book to Transplant. If I were Roulette, I would have passed the book on to Transplant. However, I don't fault him that he didn't.

 

Do you think that is a good rule? For what reason?

 

 

Yes I think it was a good rule because I understand the intent of it: Dan did not want to haggle he wanted his price he wanted his terms met unquestionably. If a buyer doesn't like the rules of the listing he can say s few this guy and his book and move on. Dan knew he had a hot book with a nice grade and he was "firm" in his price. He warned everyone an unqualified I'll take it in the thread would take the book over "ALL PMs". He is not screwing over anybody by following the rules he set out in the very beginning. Are u suggesting that he should have "changed" his own publicly posted rules and burned roulette, the guy who actually followed the rules ? That just makes no sense.

 

 

-J.

 

That's your interpretation of his intent. I don't think he ever said his price was firm or wasn't willing to haggle.

 

Actually he did say that in this listing. (thumbs u

 

-J.

[universal soldier]

[kav]

This thread is exhausting

Now I know how people feel when i post constantly