• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Hall of Shame and Probation Rules DISCUSSION
4 4

Started by Architecht,

428 posts in this topic

Gem_Mint

Gem_Mint

Posted
Posted

I'll chime in here as I recently had an issue with Paypal.

 

 

Paypal doesn't care if you're friends or not...if money is sent to buy something... it should be used as goods and services.

 

Paypal placed a 24 hour "freeze" on my account, which has since been resolved.

 

They noticed an increase in volume and many payments going out and coming in via friends and family. They didn't like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bio-Rupp

Bio-Rupp

Posted
Posted
I would like to propose a new rule.

 

According to the terms of this sales forum, people are not allowed to use Paypal Personal to pay for merchandise, as stated here:

 

List acceptable forms of payment (NOTE: Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases.)

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1460472&gonew=1#UNREAD

 

...then those who deliberately choose to use Paypal personal for merchandise give up their right to place anyone who then doesn't ship said merchandise on the Probation list.

 

Here is my reasoning:

 

PP isn't appropriate for merchandise. It is against Paypal's TOS. Fees are how Paypal provides this service. Avoiding those fees is, therefore, stealing from Paypal. So...if one steals from Paypal, why should they then be able to turn around and claim they, too, were stolen from?

 

I suspect, if the books were to be opened, the amount of fees stolen from Paypal by using Personal payments for merchandise or services would dwarf the amount of money lost by those who simply never shipped.

 

Yes, I understand that some people view Paypal as "an evil corporation, that doesn't deserve their fees." But the reality is, if you feel that way, you should avoid Paypal entirely, rather than stealing from them.

 

And if you steal from Paypal...why should you then have the right to turn around and claim "Foul!" on someone else?

 

Seems reasonable to me.

 

Thoughts?

 

I honestly can't see how someone shouldn't be offered the same protection of using the PL or the threat of PL list inclusion by using Paypal personal.

 

Paypal may frown upon it, but if they truly wanted to stop it, they would do away with the option all together. I let my buyers use it so much, I lost my option to use it. I hate that for buyers that want to save me a buck or two, but I haven't lost any sleep over it.

 

Should sending cash in the mail be frowned upon by the Post Office since they couldn't sell another money order for $3 ?

 

Even moderation is lax on the use of Paypal Personal here. They state "Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post"... they say nothing of after the sale in a PM nor do they say it is by "no means prohibited to be used by members of this site".

 

Use of cash via mail, money orders, Paypal Personal, and Western Union transfers all make it easy to steal from the buyer... why should one be worse than the other when using the PL to try to get stolen money back?

 

I don't know why you want to try to put in place a rule concerning sales and the functions of the PL list when you have openly stated you will sell to PL members. An action that undercuts what little, strained validity the PL list has.

 

I'm not knocking you because of it... that's your choice and you have every right to do so. Just sayin' that your torch for Paypal Personal usage restriction might burn brighter if you didn't feel this way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rodan57

rodan57

Posted
Posted

The Probation List is there to handle disputes between Board Members. The PayPal personal issue would be a dispute between the buyer and PayPal. One has nothing to do with the other and therefore the PayPal personal issue should be irrelevant in considering a PL nomination for un-shipped books.

 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted
I would like to propose a new rule.

 

According to the terms of this sales forum, people are not allowed to use Paypal Personal to pay for merchandise, as stated here:

 

List acceptable forms of payment (NOTE: Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases.)

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1460472&gonew=1#UNREAD

 

...then those who deliberately choose to use Paypal personal for merchandise give up their right to place anyone who then doesn't ship said merchandise on the Probation list.

 

What superb timing on this suggestion. Gosh, wonder how that came about? hm

 

You are wrong. The rule clearly states, as you quoted it, "Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases." Yes, it not not an appropriate option for goods/services. But the rule simply states you cannot use it in a listing.

 

If you are going to go this far I agree with the whole Income Tax argument. Are you going to suggest a rule that all sales here must have proof of being reported on one's income tax return (well, for US sales anyway)? Methinks doing a run around the IRS is worse than a run around PayPal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wombat

wombat

Posted
Posted
I look at it like this. I want to know if someone is ripping people off on the boards. I don't care what PayPal rules were broken. It's like punishing innocent people.

 

So, what you're suggesting is:

 

Community Protection > PayPal Interests

 

hm

 

PayPal can afford their own lawyers. They don't need our help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
I do not agree.

 

Someone relinquishing their monetary protection by paying with Personal Paypal instead of Goods/Services shouldn't be forced to relinquish their right to nominate someone for the Probation List.

 

The Probation List is used to warn other members of the community of a member who fails to live up to their obligations. It is valuable for that reason.

 

I understand you have issues with those who use Personal PayPal and, in particular, you have personal problems with SkyPinkBlu, but this is no reason a new rule should be added.

 

2c

 

This has not a single thing with to do with any particular member. I have spoken for years on this board against using Paypal personal for merchandise, so the claim that this has anything to do with a specific member would not be accurate.

 

Stealing is stealing, is it not?

 

Is one form of stealing ok, but another is not?

 

That's what it boils down to.

 

What if the buyer and seller are friends? Isn't that what the "Personal PayPal" option is labeled... Family and Friends? (shrug)

 

Paypal personal is not for merchandise, and there is no "well, I'm buying this from a friend!" clause in Paypal's TOS...you can clearly see the slippery slope that would be. This has been hashed out at great length on the boards.

 

Here's the pertinent information:

 

4. Receiving Money.

 

"4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments."

 

16. Definitions.

 

""Personal Payment" means amounts sent between two individuals (not to or from a business) without a purchase. Examples of Personal Payments include sending a gift to a friend or paying a friend back for your share of a lunch bill."

 

https://www.paypal.com/us/webapps/mpp/ua/useragreement-full

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
I look at it like this. I want to know if someone is ripping people off on the boards. I don't care what PayPal rules were broken. It's like punishing innocent people.

 

So, what you're suggesting is:

 

Community Protection > PayPal Interests

 

hm

 

PayPal can afford their own lawyers. They don't need our help.

 

Right.

 

It's ok to steal, as long as we're stealing from the right entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
Correct. Existing funds or tied Bank Account = zero fees all around. My point was just that saying its a scam to use friends and family for goods is not 100% accurate.

 

You are incorrect in your assessment, and looking at the scenario backwards.

 

It has to do with the TYPE of transaction you are making. If you are purchasing goods or services, you are REQUIRED to use the regular payment, by Paypal terms, and may NOT use the Personal option. If you're buying something...some good or service...someone always pays fees, regardless of the source of the funds.

 

It has nothing to do with source of funds for a Personal payment, and whether or not there are no fees for this or that PERSONAL payment for either party...the issue is Personal payments are not to be used to purchase goods and/or services.

 

If goods/services are being bought, you may not use Personal payment to do it. That's the bottom line.

 

Why do we maintain a Probation List at all, for people who steal from others on the board, if stealing from some entity that isn't here to defend itself is wink, wink, nudge, nudged away?

 

It is blatant hypocrisy.

 

If buyer/friend funds the PP Personal payment w/a credit card, they pay a fee. Just sayin, your black and white rule has some gray.

 

Yes exactly. Paypal gets its fees one way or another. Its a function of how the money is paid, by Paypal balance, by bank transfer or by CC, and many buyers primarily use the CC option for purchases.

 

There is no way Paypal would allow any option to exist that would exempt everyone from paying fees, unless Paypal wanted it so.

 

They are required to offer the "personal payment" option by banking law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
I would like to propose a new rule.

 

According to the terms of this sales forum, people are not allowed to use Paypal Personal to pay for merchandise, as stated here:

 

List acceptable forms of payment (NOTE: Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases.)

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1460472&gonew=1#UNREAD

 

...then those who deliberately choose to use Paypal personal for merchandise give up their right to place anyone who then doesn't ship said merchandise on the Probation list.

 

What superb timing on this suggestion. Gosh, wonder how that came about? hm

 

Because it's an issue that I've spoken against multiple times on this board, over many years, and it has come up once again. The parties involved are utterly irrelevant.

 

You are wrong. The rule clearly states, as you quoted it, "Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases." Yes, it not not an appropriate option for goods/services. But the rule simply states you cannot use it in a listing.

 

Right, because the clause "it is not appropriate for item purchases", which you just quoted, has no meaning. He really meant "it's not appropriate as a PAYMENT OPTION", rather than the clearly stated "it's not appropriate for ITEM PURCHASES."

 

"Oh, the rule just says you can't list it as an OPTION. There's NOTHING that says you can't ask for it privately, or accept it if it comes, or any other workaround to deprive Paypal of their rightfully earned fees."

 

Except, of course, Architecht and Paypal's own TOS.

 

Other than that, however...boy, can we dance, dance, dance.

 

If you are going to go this far I agree with the whole Income Tax argument. Are you going to suggest a rule that all sales here must have proof of being reported on one's income tax return (well, for US sales anyway)? Methinks doing a run around the IRS is worse than a run around PayPal.

 

Silly hyperbole. The issue with Paypal is a simple, straightforward one, that is easily resolved, by those with the desire to resolve it.

 

16.

 

"Personal Payment" means amounts sent between two individuals (not to or from a business) without a purchase. Examples of Personal Payments include sending a gift to a friend or paying a friend back for your share of a lunch bill.

 

It is blatant hypocrisy to maintain a Probation list for members stealing from one another, while stealing from Paypal is allowed, ignored, swept under the rug, pretended it's not "really stealing (as I call it)", and various and assorted other excuses.

 

It's wrong, it's hypocritical, and it needs to be addressed publicly, even if the end result is only to drive the practice underground (which it already is.) At least then, it won't be an open "eff you!" to anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
Breach, sure. Theft, not so sure.

 

If I say "hey there, KPR Comics, I'll handle your business transactions between your customers for convenience, and a small fee" and then you circumvent my clearly labeled terms of service, how have you not stolen those fees from me, fees that YOU AGREED to pay by using my service?

 

If you don't like the fees, and don't want to pay the fees...don't use Paypal.

 

If you want the convenience...pay the fees.

 

How am I even arguing this....??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
I would like to propose a new rule.

 

According to the terms of this sales forum, people are not allowed to use Paypal Personal to pay for merchandise, as stated here:

 

List acceptable forms of payment (NOTE: Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases.)

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1460472&gonew=1#UNREAD

 

...then those who deliberately choose to use Paypal personal for merchandise give up their right to place anyone who then doesn't ship said merchandise on the Probation list.

 

Here is my reasoning:

 

PP isn't appropriate for merchandise. It is against Paypal's TOS. Fees are how Paypal provides this service. Avoiding those fees is, therefore, stealing from Paypal. So...if one steals from Paypal, why should they then be able to turn around and claim they, too, were stolen from?

 

I suspect, if the books were to be opened, the amount of fees stolen from Paypal by using Personal payments for merchandise or services would dwarf the amount of money lost by those who simply never shipped.

 

Yes, I understand that some people view Paypal as "an evil corporation, that doesn't deserve their fees." But the reality is, if you feel that way, you should avoid Paypal entirely, rather than stealing from them.

 

And if you steal from Paypal...why should you then have the right to turn around and claim "Foul!" on someone else?

 

Seems reasonable to me.

 

Thoughts?

 

I honestly can't see how someone shouldn't be offered the same protection of using the PL or the threat of PL list inclusion by using Paypal personal.

 

Paypal may frown upon it, but if they truly wanted to stop it, they would do away with the option all together. I let my buyers use it so much, I lost my option to use it. I hate that for buyers that want to save me a buck or two, but I haven't lost any sleep over it.

 

Paypal is required to have a fee free transaction apparatus.

 

Should sending cash in the mail be frowned upon by the Post Office since they couldn't sell another money order for $3 ?

 

You're not stealing a USPS money order and using it in this scenario. You're using another method, independent of the USPS Money Order. The analogy doesn't work.

 

Even moderation is lax on the use of Paypal Personal here. They state "Personal PayPal is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post"... they say nothing of after the sale in a PM nor do they say it is by "no means prohibited to be used by members of this site".

 

So, because moderation is lax, that makes it ok?

 

Use of cash via mail, money orders, Paypal Personal, and Western Union transfers all make it easy to steal from the buyer... why should one be worse than the other when using the PL to try to get stolen money back?

 

By all means, feel free to argue your own particular rule changes.

 

I will point out that "sending cash, money orders, or Western Union transfers" do not involve an act of bad faith, deliberately designed to deprive an entity of their justly earned payment...aka "stealing."

 

I don't know why you want to try to put in place a rule concerning sales and the functions of the PL list when you have openly stated you will sell to PL members. An action that undercuts what little, strained validity the PL list has.

 

These kinds of things are precisely why.

 

I'm not knocking you because of it... that's your choice and you have every right to do so. Just sayin' that your torch for Paypal Personal usage restriction might burn brighter if you didn't feel this way.

 

On the contrary. It is absolutely consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4
Go to topic listing