APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED - Thread has de-railed!!

[ChrisInBaltimore]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

So then the book was sold via PM?

[AndyBoBo]

If I ever teach a contracts course again, this will be my final exam...

[VintageComics]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

But Dan's terms stated that there needed to be an in the thread and that the first one would take the book - and he also explained why he wants it that way. Unusual, but it was stated.

 

 

[Barbarian]

Imagine a buy it now + best offer ebay auction.

 

A prospective buyer makes an offer, the seller contacts the buyer and after negotiations, they both agree on the price.

 

Seller now needs to take down the auction or buyer needs to click on the counter offer link with the agreed price.

 

In the meantime, before any of that takes place, a second buyer clicks the "buy it now" button.

 

To which buyer should the book go?

[Comicopolis]

If I ever teach a contracts course again, this will be my final exam...

 

Who has passed so far?

[Bio-Rupp]

Dan stated something in one of his responses that everyone needs to put in their sales listings...

 

"MY SALES THREAD... MY RULES"

 

That should end multiple threads of endless debate over who is perceived as right and who is perceived as wrong.

 

Sorry, Rupp, but that's not how it works.

 

If you said "MY SALES THREAD...MY RULES...AND I SAY YOU HAVE TO ROB A BANK TO PAY FOR THIS ITEM", then your "rules" are invalid.

 

 

Once you stop thinking of this as the New York Stock Exchange where the owners there actually care about sales interactions and have posted rules and laws of buying and selling... and then remember this is basically a "no fee, garage sale area" for us to sell comic books... then get back to me.

 

Till then, put me back on ignore and continue your bath salt, induced interpretations of how everything works

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I know you need to be insulting to those who disagree with you, but if you're going to refer to me and what I said, I'm perfectly free to respond. If you say something that is contrary to basic logic and common sense, I'll respond with basic logic and common sense.

 

And one of those is you can't say "MY THREAD, MY RULES" if those rules are contrary to the law, for example.

 

If you can't respond without being insulting, the problem lies with you.

 

Never referred to you RMA. Never quoted you. Your name isn't even in the line above my post. I was responding to Jaydogrules quote.

 

You have the unnecessary need to push your opinion down everyone's throat... which would be fine if I asked for it. I didn't.

 

You have me on ignore... yet you chose to address me... sounds like the problem is with you (as usual).

 

I assume to you just want to dazzle me with wordplay. Trust me, you don't have to We are all dazzled enough

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

[Jaydogrules]

Dan stated something in one of his responses that everyone needs to put in their sales listings...

 

"MY SALES THREAD... MY RULES"

 

That should end multiple threads of endless debate over who is perceived as right and who is perceived as wrong.

 

Sorry, Rupp, but that's not how it works.

 

If you said "MY SALES THREAD...MY RULES...AND I SAY YOU HAVE TO ROB A BANK TO PAY FOR THIS ITEM", then your "rules" are invalid.

 

 

Once you stop thinking of this as the New York Stock Exchange where the owners there actually care about sales interactions and have posted rules and laws of buying and selling... and then remember this is basically a "no fee, garage sale area" for us to sell comic books... then get back to me.

 

Till then, put me back on ignore and continue your bath salt, induced interpretations of how everything works

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I know you need to be insulting to those who disagree with you, but if you're going to refer to me and what I said, I'm perfectly free to respond. If you say something that is contrary to basic logic and common sense, I'll respond with basic logic and common sense.

 

And one of those is you can't say "MY THREAD, MY RULES" if those rules are contrary to the law, for example.

 

If you can't respond without being insulting, the problem lies with you.

 

Just to be clear - the MY THREAD, MY RULES was not posted IN the sales thread. That was in the other thread where my character was being questioned

 

Dan don't beat your head against the wall. I followed your thread from the start and saw exactly what happened. You did not break your own rules, they were in fact quite clear. The timing of the other buyer posting the "I'll take it" in the thread after roulette already did not only suggests to me that he knew he needed to do that to secure the book, but also that he may have known he committed a little boo-boo by not posting it sooner. Again, I feel for him, but the rules were the rules.

 

-J.

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

But Dan's terms stated that there needed to be an in the thread and that the first one would take the book - and he also explained why he wants it that way. Unusual, but it was stated.

 

 

Then his counter should have included that information, and Tranny would have known that he MUST have posted that before the deal was final.

 

Tranny thought the deal was final already.

 

And here we are.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Dan don't beat your head against the wall. I followed your thread from the start and saw exactly what happened. You did not break your own rules, they were in fact quite clear. The timing of the other buyer posting the "I'll take it" in the thread after roulette already did not only suggests to me that he knew he needed to do that to secure the book, but also that he may have known he committed a little boo-boo by not posting it sooner. Again, I feel for him, but the rules were the rules.

 

-J.

 

You are, again, making assumptions.

[Spider-Dan]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

The very fact that he thought there was a deal, and didn't think he had to post take it before it was final, is the proof of that.

 

Im sorry that Mike didn't think he had to post the in the thread, but it is clear in the 1st post. Saying I had to tell him that in the PM is just silly. And Mike didn't ask me to post the for him. This is the reason for my apology... for not being more clear on my terms

[porcupine48]

Do you think he likes being called a Tranny?

[Jaydogrules]

Dan don't beat your head against the wall. I followed your thread from the start and saw exactly what happened. You did not break your own rules, they were in fact quite clear. The timing of the other buyer posting the "I'll take it" in the thread after roulette already did not only suggests to me that he knew he needed to do that to secure the book, but also that he may have known he committed a little boo-boo by not posting it sooner. Again, I feel for him, but the rules were the rules.

 

-J.

 

You are, again, making assumptions.

 

That is not an assumption. That's what happened. The only "assumption" is that the losing buyer might have realized he erred by not "taking it" in the thread per the explicit and public rules of the sale, after roulette already had.

 

-J.

[Bio-Rupp]

Dan stated something in one of his responses that everyone needs to put in their sales listings...

 

"MY SALES THREAD... MY RULES"

 

That should end multiple threads of endless debate over who is perceived as right and who is perceived as wrong.

 

Sorry, Rupp, but that's not how it works.

 

If you said "MY SALES THREAD...MY RULES...AND I SAY YOU HAVE TO ROB A BANK TO PAY FOR THIS ITEM", then your "rules" are invalid.

 

 

Once you stop thinking of this as the New York Stock Exchange where the owners there actually care about sales interactions and have posted rules and laws of buying and selling... and then remember this is basically a "no fee, garage sale area" for us to sell comic books... then get back to me.

 

Till then, put me back on ignore and continue your bath salt, induced interpretations of how everything works

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I know you need to be insulting to those who disagree with you, but if you're going to refer to me and what I said, I'm perfectly free to respond. If you say something that is contrary to basic logic and common sense, I'll respond with basic logic and common sense.

 

And one of those is you can't say "MY THREAD, MY RULES" if those rules are contrary to the law, for example.

 

If you can't respond without being insulting, the problem lies with you.

 

Just to be clear - the MY THREAD, MY RULES was not posted IN the sales thread. That was in the other thread where my character was being questioned

 

Dan it really doesn't matter on this.

 

Until someone points out a "CGC Board Stated Rules Thread" that's approved by moderation here and posted in the board rules section... then basically it is "your thread, your rules.

 

Everything else is "someone else's" opinion of what "they" believe the rule should be. I've heard it called "board etiquette" once or twice as well.

 

There is also no "board etiquette" stipulations board posted anywhere either

[PIR8]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

But Dan's terms stated that there needed to be an in the thread and that the first one would take the book - and he also explained why he wants it that way. Unusual, but it was stated.

 

 

Then his counter should have included that information, and Tranny would have known that he MUST have posted that before the deal was final.

 

Tranny thought the deal was final already.

 

And here we are.

 

Why did he have to include that as part of the counter offer? It was already stated in his sales thread. He agreed to the buyers price, but how does that negate the rules that were already in place. By that logic, he would have had to re state all his terms including shipping, payment, ect...

 

I've been following the situation since it happened, just now have time to put my in. Not specifically arguing with you RMA

[RockMyAmadeus]

Dan stated something in one of his responses that everyone needs to put in their sales listings...

 

"MY SALES THREAD... MY RULES"

 

That should end multiple threads of endless debate over who is perceived as right and who is perceived as wrong.

 

Sorry, Rupp, but that's not how it works.

 

If you said "MY SALES THREAD...MY RULES...AND I SAY YOU HAVE TO ROB A BANK TO PAY FOR THIS ITEM", then your "rules" are invalid.

 

 

Once you stop thinking of this as the New York Stock Exchange where the owners there actually care about sales interactions and have posted rules and laws of buying and selling... and then remember this is basically a "no fee, garage sale area" for us to sell comic books... then get back to me.

 

Till then, put me back on ignore and continue your bath salt, induced interpretations of how everything works

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I know you need to be insulting to those who disagree with you, but if you're going to refer to me and what I said, I'm perfectly free to respond. If you say something that is contrary to basic logic and common sense, I'll respond with basic logic and common sense.

 

And one of those is you can't say "MY THREAD, MY RULES" if those rules are contrary to the law, for example.

 

If you can't respond without being insulting, the problem lies with you.

 

Never referred to you RMA. Never quoted you. Your name isn't even in the line above my post. I was responding to Jaydogrules quote.

 

You have the unnecessary need to push your opinion down everyone's throat... which would be fine if I asked for it. I didn't.

 

You have me on ignore... yet you chose to address me... sounds like the problem is with you (as usual).

 

I assume to you just want to dazzle me with wordplay. Trust me, you don't have to We are all dazzled enough

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

Rupp...there is something called "oblique reference", and you are quite good at it. One need not specifically mention another to refer to what they have said.

 

I'm not going to insult you in return. You have a very big issue with me, though I have done nothing to you, which is why you feel the need to say things about me which aren't true, like "you have the need to push your opinion down everyone's throats." No one here is tied up. No one here is forced to read anything anyone else writes. Everyone is free to post what they will, according to the rules of the board. No one can "force their opinion" down ANYONE'S throats, except for the CCG and their representatives.

 

It's disingenuous to say that.

 

I do wish, however, that you would not try to interact with me, on any level. Is that really all that much to ask?

 

[VintageComics]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

But Dan's terms stated that there needed to be an in the thread and that the first one would take the book - and he also explained why he wants it that way. Unusual, but it was stated.

 

 

Then his counter should have included that information, and Tranny would have known that he MUST have posted that before the deal was final.

 

Tranny thought the deal was final already.

 

And here we are.

 

Because we are used to that sort of information, it's confusing as to why he didn't but I do believe technically, those rules were spelled out in the first post.

 

I too would have sold the book to Mike, but I understand why Dan didn't.

 

And that is why we are here.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA just curious what state do you practice law in?

 

None. Why?

Because at least under New York law (where I practice) your interpretation of basic contract law is flawed. Just because transplant dickered over a term in the contract (in this case the price) it does not fundamentally change the terms of the rest of the contract (I.e. its not suddenly also a new shipping/payment/acceptance terms) he still had to be the first :take it: in thread. Also there are decades of case law dealing with this (usually with phone call versus mail acceptance of a contract)

Was curious what state you practiced in that differed since I haven't found one yet.

 

All true...however, that's not what happened here. Dan did not follow his own terms. He accepted an offer without stipulating that said offer was not valid until and unless the take it emoticon was posted in the thread.

 

He contradicted his own terms, and that's where the problem lies.

 

 

 

 

Mike accepted MY counter and everything got posted BEFORE I read it, therefore I did NOT contradict my own terms

 

Yes, you did. You made him an offer, and he accepted.

 

Deal struck.

 

You did not make a counter which included the requirement to post take it before the deal was valid.

 

And that's why we're here.

 

But Dan's terms stated that there needed to be an in the thread and that the first one would take the book - and he also explained why he wants it that way. Unusual, but it was stated.

 

 

Then his counter should have included that information, and Tranny would have known that he MUST have posted that before the deal was final.

 

Tranny thought the deal was final already.

 

And here we are.

 

Why did he have to include that as part of the counter offer? It was already stated in his sales thread. He agreed to the buyers price, but how does that negate the rules that were already in place. By that logic, he would have had to re state all his terms including shipping, payment, ect...

 

I've been following the situation since it happened, just now have time to put my in. Not specifically arguing with you RMA

 

Because the buyer clearly thought the deal was final, and the seller gave him no reason to believe otherwise.

 

No other reason.

 

No problem, I can handle arguments. Imagine the arguments that took place at the Constitutional Convention in 1787...

[ChrisInBaltimore]

It is Dan's sales thread and his terms. It is an odd grey area and why board posted rules would be helpful. I understand they would give CGC some liability though.

[Scturo]

If you are communicating with a buyer, and a deal is made, that should be the deal. His deal was the first you accepted.

[MCMiles]

A deal was made between both parties via PM. Booth parties went on about other business.

 

After that an I'll take it was posted in the thread.

 

Because the rules say "...trumps ALL PMs" the first deal was abandoned by the seller, which by his rules allows him to do so.

 

Seriously, do people think this is rule of "I'll take it in the thread trumps all" (including done deals) is a good way of doing it? Do people really think it's a better way than using a time stamp (definitive proof) to determine who bought the book first?

 

The absolute only benefit of that is to the seller. It could prompt people to buy quickly rather than send an offer,(i get that) or allow the seller to back out of a deal to take a better price or a preferred customer. (shady)

 

If time stamp rules is in affect, the worst thing that could happen is a public buyer be told that it already sold via PM, which they should be aware that it might be especially if it had been sitting there for more than 60 seconds.

At least no one that thinks they actually have a deal in place is going to get burnt.

 

Maybe Transplant should have been aware that unless he posted in the thread, he could still get trumped, but since it's very uncommon to make a deal and then it be broken in this way, I'm certain he didn't consider it. I'm sure most would not.