Hall of Shame and Probation Rules DISCUSSION 4 4

[RockMyAmadeus]

But if unethical behavior is allowed to flourish because "hey, XXXX does it, and XXXX is a respected board member, and YYYY also says there's no problem with it, so I guess it's ok!" then how long before everyone is using Paypal personal for purchases, because no one has a problem with it? After all...people have openly declared that they will continue to steal from Paypal by using Personal for purchases, and not caring one bit about it.

 

Indeed, almost no one has taken a stand with me and said "listen...Paypal provides a service, we should pay for that service, and using that service without paying for it really is stealing from them."

 

That is corruption, on a grand scale. And it wouldn't be half as bad, if we maintained no PL/HOS at all...at least we would be consistent. But it's made worse by giving lip service to fair play and justice, but ignoring it when it's convenient.

RMA, unethical behavior is not always algebra. While your principles when you start a discussion are almost always perfectly sound, there is clearly an element of free will involved when you do something bad.

I dont think I have ever paid attention in the few cases someone sent me a PayPal payment with a "Personal" option, especially within a donation thread (which at least from one of the two parties is indeed a donation).

 

So Ill make you a very simple example: if an institution, or the very institution which emanates "laws" becomes corrupted, what determines the bad quality of an action? Laws are not absolute, they are both a means and a way to test good will. The principles on which laws are based are as much important as the laws themselves, otherwise youd be easily fallen "under the law", instead having the law as an element of liberation.

 

So, in short, while your point is clear, there are cases in which the contextual elements are as much important as the law itself, and this is clearly one of these. PayPal is not certainly an ideal example of crystal clear rules right now, as it seems it makes everything more and more complicate to prevent you from understanding what is going on when you use their services. Is that a highly ethical behavior? I think it is open to discussion. :shrug:

 

If you use a service...you should pay for a service.

 

What the service provider does otherwise isn't relevant to you paying for a service you use. If you are opposed to the actions of the service provider, you shouldn't use their service. If you cannot understand how their service works, you shouldn't use it until you can and do. Paypal's behavior has no bearing on yours when you decide to use their service.

 

This isn't rocket science, nor is it algebra. You use the service...you pay for the service.

 

[HighRadArt]

 

Exactly!

[techtre2003]

I understand what RMA is saying. I don't know if anyone on this thread is a member of Blowout cards, but this is their rule regarding Paypal gift:

 

Asking for Paypal Gift payments is NOT allowed. Please be aware that if you send payment as a GIFT, you will NOT be able to file a claim if there is a problem with the shipment. Sending payment as a gift is the same as sending cash or a money order! We do not recommend sending Paypal payments as a gift.

 

Like RMA stated previously, when someone comes in complaining that they didn't receive their stuff when paying personal, the reaction is in fact "WHY did you pay personal?!". The reasoning is that by paying with personal, you have no recourse through Paypal if something should happen.

 

That being said, it seems to me that the real service that Paypal is actually providing with regular payments is buyer protection. That protection is removed when you are paying personal. It doesn't really seem like "stealing" to me because you are no longer gaining the buyer protection service that Paypal provides with a fee associated payment. I don't think you have a leg to stand on getting your money back from Paypal and you only have yourself to blame for doing it, but I don't think it hurts to make others aware of what happened even if you are partially to blame.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

I know I'm a catalyst for him, so I'm not going to answer again, not only do I know I can't win an argument with him, I don't really want to bother. Life is too short and I'm not going to waste any more of it on this.

 

Have a nice day.

 

You think more highly of yourself than you ought, and you think that this has something to do with you, personally.

 

It does not, as I have now said repeatedly.

 

I am discussing principles. That you happened to be "A catalyst" is meaningless; it would have been the same response from me no matter WHO was involved.

 

If you wish to believe that this is personal, and that you are some sort of victim of me, that is your right to believe, despite the evidence of me literally ignoring every word you've said for years. You are the one who had the problem with me...not the other way around, as you very well know.

 

You don't own principles. You don't own ideas. If I choose to talk about a principle that happens to touch on an issue you've had, that doesn't mean it's about you.

 

You instantly notify the mods when I post something you even suspect is about you. I am asking you...again...to abide by the same standard. Please stop referring to me in your posts, as I have not referred to you in mine.

 

If you think this song is about you...you're singing the wrong tune.

 

Thank you.

[vaillant]

You don't own principles. You don't own ideas. If I choose to talk about a principle that happens to touch on an issue you've had, that doesn't mean it's about you.

OK, I agree.

But we are human, and that is bound to happen. When someone has scars (I mean inner scars) or simply is touched upon something he is more sensible to, there are reactions that, if not fully rational, should be understood.

 

Don’t take this in a wrong way but my impression is that this tendency you have is akin to "dissecting" situations in order to determine the morality of actions or cases on a general: while this is often necessary and of primary importance, you often can't do it on a "grand scale" the risk is to sound presumptuous but – way more important – is to completely misjudge a situation because of a process of abstraction.

Does this make less valid your points about principles? No. Truth is absolute.

But it is dangerous as it can expose you to some kind of judgement, or make people judgemental towards you, in a personal way.

 

And the Internet (and current mass media) just worsen it.

 

(Now do not think this is "in defense" of Sharon: I am mentioning her because recently we have had a sort of small "quarrel" via PM and while I believe none of us was fully satisfied we just stepped out of it: we all have defects and we should use these experiences, which often are sad and resonate for a long time, as a means to become more humble. By God's grace.)

 

BTW, I would like to reply more extensively about PayPal issue, but that would be long: I have been using PayPal since 1996, you are right in that I should stop using it, but when understanding rules becomes almost a job in itself, there is something wrong in a "service" if you allow me.

[vaillant]

BTW, I used the word "quarrel": even if in brackets I see it's a strong word in english, I just meant a discussion.

This gives me the opportunity to say that often is not easy to discuss: some people just prefer to avoid it, because the other party is bound to become passionate and treat us unfairly: good, it’s always worth doing if you stay calm.

 

Mother Teresa of Calcutta once said "man is egocentric, irrational, unfair". It’s unimportant: love him all the same" – or something like that.

[seanfingh]

I know I'm a catalyst for him, so I'm not going to answer again, not only do I know I can't win an argument with him, I don't really want to bother. Life is too short and I'm not going to waste any more of it on this.

 

Have a nice day.

 

You think more highly of yourself than you ought, and you think that this has something to do with you, personally.

 

It does not, as I have now said repeatedly.

 

I am discussing principles. That you happened to be "A catalyst" is meaningless; it would have been the same response from me no matter WHO was involved.

 

If you wish to believe that this is personal, and that you are some sort of victim of me, that is your right to believe, despite the evidence of me literally ignoring every word you've said for years. You are the one who had the problem with me...not the other way around, as you very well know.

 

You don't own principles. You don't own ideas. If I choose to talk about a principle that happens to touch on an issue you've had, that doesn't mean it's about you.

 

You instantly notify the mods when I post something you even suspect is about you. I am asking you...again...to abide by the same standard. Please stop referring to me in your posts, as I have not referred to you in mine.

 

If you think this song is about you...you're singing the wrong tune.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Irony, it's what's for dinner.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I know I'm a catalyst for him, so I'm not going to answer again, not only do I know I can't win an argument with him, I don't really want to bother. Life is too short and I'm not going to waste any more of it on this.

 

Have a nice day.

 

You think more highly of yourself than you ought, and you think that this has something to do with you, personally.

 

It does not, as I have now said repeatedly.

 

I am discussing principles. That you happened to be "A catalyst" is meaningless; it would have been the same response from me no matter WHO was involved.

 

If you wish to believe that this is personal, and that you are some sort of victim of me, that is your right to believe, despite the evidence of me literally ignoring every word you've said for years. You are the one who had the problem with me...not the other way around, as you very well know.

 

You don't own principles. You don't own ideas. If I choose to talk about a principle that happens to touch on an issue you've had, that doesn't mean it's about you.

 

You instantly notify the mods when I post something you even suspect is about you. I am asking you...again...to abide by the same standard. Please stop referring to me in your posts, as I have not referred to you in mine.

 

If you think this song is about you...you're singing the wrong tune.

 

Thank you.

 

 

Irony, it's what's for dinner.

 

I know, right? In so many more ways, too....

 

[PovertyRow]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=381245&Number=8675893#Post8675893

 

Pages and pages and pages about how, where, what, why, when, and with whom.

 

At what point do we recognize that trying to micromanage every single possible permutation of a transaction down to its quarks and gluons will never work?

 

 

[HarveySwick]

[Iceman399]

Wall of text incoming. Woot Woot. Wall of text incoming

[PovertyRow]

 

Y'arrrghhh Matey. Pass some o'dem kernels over here!

[jaybuck43]

I'm making cookies and cream milkshakes over here if anyone wants to come over. My GF loves them

[jsilverjanet]

 

Y'arrrghhh Matey. Pass some o'dem kernels over here!

 

Get a room!

[jsilverjanet]

I'm making cookies and cream milkshakes over here if anyone wants to come over. My GF loves them

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=381245&Number=8675893#Post8675893

 

Pages and pages and pages about how, where, what, why, when, and with whom.

 

At what point do we recognize that trying to micromanage every single possible permutation of a transaction down to its quarks and gluons will never work?

 

 

 

Right. There's micromanagement...then there's the simple & obvious, right in front of our noses. You choose the immensely and unnecessarily complex, and ignore the very simple and obvious.

 

Why? Who knows?

 

Sorry to disappoint you, "ice."

[PovertyRow]

I'm making cookies and cream milkshakes over here if anyone wants to come over. My GF loves them

 

 

 

Y'arrrghhh Matey. Pass some o'dem kernels over here!

 

Get a room!

 

Come join Harvey and Jaybuck and me, Jsilver, for Pirate Poppers and Cookies and Cream Shakes!

[PovertyRow]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=381245&Number=8678345#Post8678345

 

Except this isn't a data-rich, scientific expedition, where minutiae matters and makes a difference. You're all talking about trying to make rules that cover every possible permutation of human behavior as a buyer/seller on these boards, and it's simply not possible to do that without strangling the entire thing to death in the process.

 

But hey, by all means, 10 years of this back and forth has only made the Probation List (and the HOS) grow to gargantuan sizes, so what do I know.

 

 

("ice"?)

[Dr Chaos]

If you see someone using Paypal personal for the sale of merchandise and you have a problem with that by all means feel free to contact Paypal and rat them out if that makes you feel better.

 

With that being said, the proposed rule to strip someone of any recourse because they have committed the sin of paying with or accepting payment via Paypal personal has absolutely no merit whatsoever.

 

The rules, and the lists were created to protect members of this forum from unscrupulous buyers and sellers. Letting a buyer or seller off the hook for failing to honor their word because the other party has somehow wronged Paypal would only leave the rest of us open to get screwed on the next transaction.

 

The buyer has already been punished once by losing the ability to dispute the transaction through Paypal, stripping them of the right to nominate a bad seller for PL seems like overkill,

 

There is already a rule against sellers requesting Paypal personal and I think that is all that we need on these boards.

[JAM_NYC]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=381245&Number=8678345#Post8678345

 

Except this isn't a data-rich, scientific expedition, where minutiae matters and makes a difference. You're all talking about trying to make rules that cover every possible permutation of human behavior as a buyer/seller on these boards, and it's simply not possible to do that without strangling the entire thing to death in the process.

 

But hey, by all means, 10 years of this back and forth has only made the Probation List (and the HOS) grow to gargantuan sizes, so what do I know.

 

 

("ice"?)