Hall of Shame and Probation Rules DISCUSSION 4 4

[wombat]

So we can add a hypocritical list.

[porcupine48]

Aint nobody got time for that

[HarveySwick]

Maybe Mr. PayPal should become a member and start nominating people to the Probation List.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Man, you really don't like Sharon.

 

This has nothing to do with "Sharon", or anyone else personally.

 

That "Sharon" was the catalyst for this round is not relevant.

 

She is not the first, and will not be the last.

 

Why make comments like this? To stir the pot.

 

 

 

[CAHokie]

Maybe Mr. PayPal should become a member and start nominating people to the Probation List.

 

 

Your going on first buddy!

[comix4fun]

I will re-post what I said earlier, because it is the heart of the matter:

 

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.

 

I agree completely.

 

When this board is firmly committed to justice for ALL parties, then I will heartily endorse and agree with your positions.

 

Until then, it is the rankest hypocrisy to complain about one party stealing from you, when you, yourself, stole from another party in the course of the transaction.

 

That doesn't absolve the first party. They still need to address the issue.

 

But to publicly complain about it, after having done the same thing to another party in the transaction, is blatantly hypocritical, and should be addressed as such.

 

Many people have done it, over many years, and many more people have justified it over many more years.

 

That doesn't change anything.

 

 

I completely understand your point about paypal personal.

 

However, isn't removing any recourse from the person who paid "Personal", in defense of paypal's policies, and allowing the party who took the money and didn't perform ALSO become a situation where there isn't justice for all parties involved.

 

Isn't defending Paypal only, and not all parties against theft and wrongdoing hypocritical?

 

There's a recourse for improper personal paypal payments, through paypal, and they enforce it rather regularly. However denying PL recourse entirely, due to improper use of personal paypal, is denying both notice to the boards and compensation to the buyer of a (for example for ease of % fees paypal charges) $100 wrong due to failure of payment of a $3 fee.

 

That equates to disproportionate punishment when, as personal payment limits ability to recoup loss, one of the only ways product or funds my be returned to the buyer is through the PL.

 

Eliminating the ability to list on the PL list for this reason handicaps everyone the list is meant to protect, and protects everyone it was meant to handicap.

[James J]

I agree +1

[ebtorres]

I will re-post what I said earlier, because it is the heart of the matter:

 

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.

 

I agree completely.

 

When this board is firmly committed to justice for ALL parties, then I will heartily endorse and agree with your positions.

 

Until then, it is the rankest hypocrisy to complain about one party stealing from you, when you, yourself, stole from another party in the course of the transaction.

 

That doesn't absolve the first party. They still need to address the issue.

 

But to publicly complain about it, after having done the same thing to another party in the transaction, is blatantly hypocritical, and should be addressed as such.

 

Many people have done it, over many years, and many more people have justified it over many more years.

 

That doesn't change anything.

 

 

I completely understand your point about paypal personal.

 

However, isn't removing any recourse from the person who paid "Personal", in defense of paypal's policies, and allowing the party who took the money and didn't perform ALSO become a situation where there isn't justice for all parties involved.

 

Isn't defending Paypal only, and not all parties against theft and wrongdoing hypocritical?

 

There's a recourse for improper personal paypal payments, through paypal, and they enforce it rather regularly. However denying PL recourse entirely, due to improper use of personal paypal, is denying both notice to the boards and compensation to the buyer of a (for example for ease of % fees paypal charges) $100 wrong due to failure of payment of a $3 fee.

 

That equates to disproportionate punishment when, as personal payment limits ability to recoup loss, one of the only ways product or funds my be returned to the buyer is through the PL.

 

Eliminating the ability to list on the PL list for this reason handicaps everyone the list is meant to protect, and protects everyone it was meant to handicap.

 

[Junkdrawer]

Paypal

[RockMyAmadeus]

I will re-post what I said earlier, because it is the heart of the matter:

 

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.

 

I agree completely.

 

When this board is firmly committed to justice for ALL parties, then I will heartily endorse and agree with your positions.

 

Until then, it is the rankest hypocrisy to complain about one party stealing from you, when you, yourself, stole from another party in the course of the transaction.

 

That doesn't absolve the first party. They still need to address the issue.

 

But to publicly complain about it, after having done the same thing to another party in the transaction, is blatantly hypocritical, and should be addressed as such.

 

Many people have done it, over many years, and many more people have justified it over many more years.

 

That doesn't change anything.

 

 

I completely understand your point about paypal personal.

 

However, isn't removing any recourse from the person who paid "Personal", in defense of paypal's policies, and allowing the party who took the money and didn't perform ALSO become a situation where there isn't justice for all parties involved.

 

Isn't defending Paypal only, and not all parties against theft and wrongdoing hypocritical?

 

There's a recourse for improper personal paypal payments, through paypal, and they enforce it rather regularly. However denying PL recourse entirely, due to improper use of personal paypal, is denying both notice to the boards and compensation to the buyer of a (for example for ease of % fees paypal charges) $100 wrong due to failure of payment of a $3 fee.

 

That equates to disproportionate punishment when, as personal payment limits ability to recoup loss, one of the only ways product or funds my be returned to the buyer is through the PL.

 

Eliminating the ability to list on the PL list for this reason handicaps everyone the list is meant to protect, and protects everyone it was meant to handicap.

 

I completely understand your point about redress for the buyer, and said so several times earlier.

 

My proposed "rule change" will get nowhere, nor was it ever intended to.

 

And I never said a buyer didn't have the right to "be made whole." I said they shouldn't be allowed to put someone ON THE PROBATION LIST (which has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual mechanics of someone "being made whole", outside of some nebulous peer pressure that may or may not actually exist.)

 

However...if more people wake up to the reality of stealing from Paypal through the abuse of the Personal payment system, and stop letting it be openly acceptable at any level, then this will have served its purpose.

 

As I said before...this board has composed endless discussion about making sure that buyers and sellers are protected, and not taken advantage of. That's a good, noble thing.

 

But in the course of that dialogue, the idea that it was ok to steal from another party in the transaction...in this case, Paypal...became so acceptable that few ever questioned it, and hardly anyone ever challenged it, and in the course of all of these, people have openly declared their intent to continue to steal from Paypal.

 

In light of the one (the PL/HOS), how could the other be tolerated?

 

"It's not stealing." Oh, yes, it is. You're depriving Paypal of their rightfully earned fee for using their service, by using a payment method that explicitly states that it is not to be used to buy things. You are taking service from Paypal without paying them for it. There is no other definition for theft than that.

 

I don't like Paypal. I think they are a horrible company, that has done horrible things over the years. But they provide a service, and if I choose to use that service, I choose to pay for that service. Choosing to not pay for that service, while still taking advantage of that service, is stealing.

 

And all the fancy dancing around the issue won't change that.

 

If we're to maintain integrity on ANY side, we ought to maintain integrity on ALL sides, or it all becomes a joke.

 

 

 

[skypinkblu]

Whether RMA meant to call me out or not, only he knows. I know that my name keeps being mentioned and I'm uncomfortable.

 

I had posted an explanation, not that I think I need to defend myself, but because I would like to just put an end to this. I erased it because I do not like to get into these kinds of arguments, but for the sake of hopefully putting an end to my name being called out, I'm going to post it again.

'

Regarding my payment with personal PP funds to mscn34:

 

When I purchased a Wonder Woman book from him several months ago, he asked for personal Paypal. I didn't pay him that way. I paid him with regular PP and I added on the fees that he would have been charged to the payment.

 

This time he was asking for help because his grandmother passed away, so I viewed it differently.

 

Each time I've run or helped with a charity thread PP has been called, either by ME, or by whomever has the password for the PP account.

 

Each time, I've asked if it's OK for a chatboard to donate money and items, have them paid for with Personal PP, and to please not lock the account.

 

I do this because with the very first charity thread (Nik's) we made so much money they temporarily locked the account, so I was forewarned.

 

Each time I asked, PP assured me there would be no problem and significantly, there was no problem.

 

Anyone who has ever worked with me on one of these charity threads, and there have been a lot of you, can verify that we make sure it's OK with PP first, so there won't be a problem later..

 

So...That's how I viewed this payment. In the same way, since the person needed help and was selling items for that reason. As I do sometimes in charity threads, I purchased items I don't really collect. That's what many of you do.

 

I had nothing to gain by using personal PP, I could only lose if there was a problem. That's why I was annoyed with myself, because I fell for someone's story again.

 

I never posted here expecting to get my money back, the probation list cannot do that for me, it's gone as far as I'm concerned..and while I would have prefered using it for something I want...worst stuff happens all the time, it's not going to change my life.

 

The only reason I was posting here was to warn others so that they didn't walk into a risky situation. I felt like I should give all the details, so I did.

 

I'm sorry for the people who have had trouble with personal payments. I use them rarely, and I usually have a rationale. I'm not saying always because I'm absolutely not perfect and I don't remember stuff like that, it's not terribly important to me.

 

I'd gladly send PP $3 if it would make all of posts about stealing stop, but I know it's not going to happen. Those accusations are ...well, I'm glad at least, I'm not being called an ax murderer, things could be worse;)

 

I am going to go and spend some time doing something other than read the board for a bit, until things calm down.

 

Have a great night.

 

[seanfingh]

via Imgflip Meme Maker

[Junkdrawer]

Lets ban paypal use from this forum. Lets use USPS money orders, checks and cash. (thumbs u

[jsilverjanet]

Lets ban paypal use from this forum. Lets use USPS money orders, checks and cash. (thumbs u

 

BITCOIN!!!!

[joeypost]

via Imgflip Meme Maker

 

We need a "like" button.

[Dano]

Thank you, Sharon for describing how you and others have worked with PP on the charity threads. That is truly cool. Your rationale for your current complaint is sound to me, for what that is worth.

 

I have used Personal in the past, but felt weird each time I've done it. So now, I am prone to just suggest an additional 3% that I happily pay. TBH, I've thought that most people on here also rarely, if at all, use Personal. I read the rules that way - but I guess it's easier in PM's to negotiate something else?

 

I will never again send personal to a seller - and if that's a deal breaker, so be it.

 

On another collector site for stuff I dig, they are paypal personal almost exclusively and practically demand it. I have been one of the very few that ask to pay additional to make sure I'm covered, because frankly, that's what worries me the most - protection.

 

Dan

[CAHokie]

Whether RMA meant to call me out or not, only he knows. I know that my name keeps being mentioned and I'm uncomfortable.

 

I had posted an explanation, not that I think I need to defend myself, but because I would like to just put an end to this. I erased it because I do not like to get into these kinds of arguments, but for the sake of hopefully putting an end to my name being called out, I'm going to post it again.

'

Regarding my payment with personal PP funds to mscn34:

 

When I purchased a Wonder Woman book from him several months ago, he asked for personal Paypal. I didn't pay him that way. I paid him with regular PP and I added on the fees that he would have been charged to the payment.

 

This time he was asking for help because his grandmother passed away, so I viewed it differently.

 

Each time I've run or helped with a charity thread PP has been called, either by ME, or by whomever has the password for the PP account.

 

Each time, I've asked if it's OK for a chatboard to donate money and items, have them paid for with Personal PP, and to please not lock the account.

 

I do this because with the very first charity thread (Nik's) we made so much money they temporarily locked the account, so I was forewarned.

 

Each time I asked, PP assured me there would be no problem and significantly, there was no problem.

 

Anyone who has ever worked with me on one of these charity threads, and there have been a lot of you, can verify that we make sure it's OK with PP first, so there won't be a problem later..

 

So...That's how I viewed this payment. In the same way, since the person needed help and was selling items for that reason. As I do sometimes in charity threads, I purchased items I don't really collect. That's what many of you do.

 

I had nothing to gain by using personal PP, I could only lose if there was a problem. That's why I was annoyed with myself, because I fell for someone's story again.

 

I never posted here expecting to get my money back, the probation list cannot do that for me, it's gone as far as I'm concerned..and while I would have prefered using it for something I want...worst stuff happens all the time, it's not going to change my life.

 

The only reason I was posting here was to warn others so that they didn't walk into a risky situation. I felt like I should give all the details, so I did.

 

I'm sorry for the people who have had trouble with personal payments. I use them rarely, and I usually have a rationale. I'm not saying always because I'm absolutely not perfect and I don't remember stuff like that, it's not terribly important to me.

 

I'd gladly send PP $3 if it would make all of posts about stealing stop, but I know it's not going to happen. Those accusations are ...well, I'm glad at least, I'm not being called an ax murderer, things could be worse;)

 

I am going to go and spend some time doing something other than read the board for a bit, until things calm down.

 

Have a great night.

 

 

It sucks that your name was called out, because I doubt anyone (I would hope) would think you were trying to cheat anyone. I completely agree that charity threads are a totally different animal than a normal purchase on the boards.

[NP_Gresham]

More Rules

[HarveySwick]

Whether RMA meant to call me out or not, only he knows. I know that my name keeps being mentioned and I'm uncomfortable.

 

I had posted an explanation, not that I think I need to defend myself, but because I would like to just put an end to this. I erased it because I do not like to get into these kinds of arguments, but for the sake of hopefully putting an end to my name being called out, I'm going to post it again.

'

Regarding my payment with personal PP funds to mscn34:

 

When I purchased a Wonder Woman book from him several months ago, he asked for personal Paypal. I didn't pay him that way. I paid him with regular PP and I added on the fees that he would have been charged to the payment.

 

This time he was asking for help because his grandmother passed away, so I viewed it differently.

 

Each time I've run or helped with a charity thread PP has been called, either by ME, or by whomever has the password for the PP account.

 

Each time, I've asked if it's OK for a chatboard to donate money and items, have them paid for with Personal PP, and to please not lock the account.

 

I do this because with the very first charity thread (Nik's) we made so much money they temporarily locked the account, so I was forewarned.

 

Each time I asked, PP assured me there would be no problem and significantly, there was no problem.

 

Anyone who has ever worked with me on one of these charity threads, and there have been a lot of you, can verify that we make sure it's OK with PP first, so there won't be a problem later..

 

So...That's how I viewed this payment. In the same way, since the person needed help and was selling items for that reason. As I do sometimes in charity threads, I purchased items I don't really collect. That's what many of you do.

 

I had nothing to gain by using personal PP, I could only lose if there was a problem. That's why I was annoyed with myself, because I fell for someone's story again.

 

I never posted here expecting to get my money back, the probation list cannot do that for me, it's gone as far as I'm concerned..and while I would have prefered using it for something I want...worst stuff happens all the time, it's not going to change my life.

 

The only reason I was posting here was to warn others so that they didn't walk into a risky situation. I felt like I should give all the details, so I did.

 

I'm sorry for the people who have had trouble with personal payments. I use them rarely, and I usually have a rationale. I'm not saying always because I'm absolutely not perfect and I don't remember stuff like that, it's not terribly important to me.

 

I'd gladly send PP $3 if it would make all of posts about stealing stop, but I know it's not going to happen. Those accusations are ...well, I'm glad at least, I'm not being called an ax murderer, things could be worse;)

 

I am going to go and spend some time doing something other than read the board for a bit, until things calm down.

 

Have a great night.

 

 

 

It sucks that your name was called out, because I doubt anyone (I would hope) would think you were trying to cheat anyone. I completely agree that charity threads are a totally different animal than a normal purchase on the boards.

 

 

She's immoral and is stealing from PayPal.

[CAHokie]

Sharon to the Probation List then!