General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[mschmidt]

Am I missing something here? Rupp's thread clearly states:

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

It doesn't say anything about the "I'll take it" having to be posted in the actual thread - it just says that the first one posted gets the sale.

 

And as Green was the first to post the "I'll take it", the books are clearly his :shrug:

[Bio-Rupp]

Am I missing something here? Rupp's thread clearly states:

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

It doesn't say anything about the "I'll take it" having to be posted in the actual thread - it just says that the first one posted gets the sale.

 

And as Green was the first to post the "I'll take it", the books are clearly his :shrug:

 

How can he lay claim if his "take it" was within the PM that a "take it" trumps... the semantics are sound to me sir.

 

Plus I'm not having a sale thread in my personal message area... its in public few. Don't understand why this is so hard to comprehend.

Edited November 24, 2010 by Bio-Rupp

[A-DONIS]

We all know that the sales forum rules are that on the actualy forum overules any PM deals.

 

The only time this does not apply is when the seller HOLDS the book for a particular buyer.

 

But IF I was talking to a seller via PM, working out a deal, and then someone WHO DOESN'T KNOW that something is clearly being worked out... I WILL NOT get mad at the seller.

 

Simply put, if you want a book, POST If for some reason the seller/buyer are working out a deal then HOLD the books. IF you can't HOLD them and someone beats you to it, so be it.

 

 

[Bosco685]

Am I missing something here? Rupp's thread clearly states:

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

It doesn't say anything about the "I'll take it" having to be posted in the actual thread - it just says that the first one posted gets the sale.

 

And as Green was the first to post the "I'll take it", the books are clearly his :shrug:

 

It appears to be confusion over what was meant by the rules (of course).

 

I'm reading it as in the sales thread overrides any PM discussions and agreements. To ensure this was followed, Bio-Rupp even requests politely that Green goes back to the sales thread and posts the to finalize the deal. So it seems pretty clear what was needed to finalize the agreement.

 

But I think the exchange between the two parties is clouding their judgment to work this out. Maybe take a break from the sales area, go grab some pre-Thanksgiving snacks, and then come on back.

[divad]

Why didn't Green go post the when I asked him too... especially since it's posted rule # 1. That was my rule and for some reason, even when asked to, he chose not to abide by it.

 

Actually, once you confirmed the sale with Green, it then becomes your responsibility to mark it "sold".

 

You really are just trying to skirt around your acceptance of his offer Period. All the rest of the reasoning is irrelevant.

[divad]

We all know that the sales forum rules are that on the actualy forum overules any PM deals.

 

 

100 people will soon disagree with this.

[mschmidt]

Am I missing something here? Rupp's thread clearly states:

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

It doesn't say anything about the "I'll take it" having to be posted in the actual thread - it just says that the first one posted gets the sale.

 

And as Green was the first to post the "I'll take it", the books are clearly his :shrug:

 

How can he lay claim if his "take it" was within the PM that a "take it" trumps... the semantics are sound to me sir.

 

Plus I'm not having a sale thread in my personal message area... its in public few. Don't understand why this is so hard to comprehend.

 

Because you didn't write "first in the thread gets it".

 

As a buyer & a seller I don't give a hoot where the "I'll take it" is posted - in the thread, in a PM, it's all the same. And if two people post an "I'll take it" at the same time (one in a PM, one in the thread), the time stamp decides who gets the books.

 

Seriously ... you wrote back to Green and said "Sold!" when he posted the "I'll take it" in the PM - at that point there's no question that this is a done deal.

[divad]

Seriously ... you wrote back to Green and said "Sold!" when he posted the "I'll take it" in the PM - at that point there's no question that this is a done deal.

 

Absolutely, any other interpretation is implausible.

[Bosco685]

Seriously ... you wrote back to Green and said "Sold!" when he posted the "I'll take it" in the PM - at that point there's no question that this is a done deal.

 

I'm not sure it is that cut and dry, though I don't want to add to the tension.

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

I'm reading this, and "trumps any and all PM's" seems to be clear. But I've also witnessed sellers agree to a sale via PM, and then mark the item as "sold via PM." It appears Bio-Rupp was taking the former approach, and not the latter.

 

Again, this seems to be a disagreement over interpretation of the sales rules.

[mschmidt]

Seriously ... you wrote back to Green and said "Sold!" when he posted the "I'll take it" in the PM - at that point there's no question that this is a done deal.

 

I'm not sure it is that cut and dry, though I don't want to add to the tension.

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

I'm reading this, and "trumps any and all PM's" seems to be clear. But I've also witnessed sellers agree to a sale via PM, and then mark the item as "sold via PM." It appears Bio-Rupp was taking the former approach, and not the latter.

 

Again, this seems to be a disagreement over interpretation of the sales rules.

 

I just don't get why he'd write back and say "Sold!" if the books weren't actually sold - that makes zero sense, Nick :shrug:

[3319comics]

I agree , maybe instead of saying deal or sold in the pm, he should have said :

 

I will agree to this deal only if you post in the original sales thread otherwise someone else can come by and take the lot.

 

 

[Bosco685]

I just don't get why he'd write back and say "Sold!" if the books weren't actually sold - that makes zero sense, Nick :shrug:

 

I know - this is a slightly challenging one. But when Bio-Rupp then made that second comment, couldn't Green have stated, "I'd rather not - why don't you mark it as sold" and this would be a non-issue?

 

Sold!

 

If you don't mind, please throw up the "Take It's" in both threads.

 

You sir, are awesome!

 

Many thanks

 

M

 

How long within the 15 minutes between that post and the thread post was it that Green had a chance to read that note? I think this is where the breakdown happened.

[Bio-Rupp]

Seriously ... you wrote back to Green and said "Sold!" when he posted the "I'll take it" in the PM - at that point there's no question that this is a done deal.

 

I'm not sure it is that cut and dry, though I don't want to add to the tension.

 

First gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

I'm reading this, and "trumps any and all PM's" seems to be clear. But I've also witnessed sellers agree to a sale via PM, and then mark the item as "sold via PM." It appears Bio-Rupp was taking the former approach, and not the latter.

 

Again, this seems to be a disagreement over interpretation of the sales rules.

 

I just don't get why he'd write back and say "Sold!" if the books weren't actually sold - that makes zero sense, Nick :shrug:

 

I guess in a "perfect world", it wouldn't have been that big of a deal for Green to just go and put "take its" up as asked and as the rule states. Twisting the words for his benefit aren't going to get him what he lost fair and square.

 

Wether I said "sold" or not is a mute point if it's in a "PM" and "I'll take its" trump PMs. Thats how its written. Rules change depending on who feels cheated it appears.

 

Why would I even bother putting "take it" trumps PM's... if thats not what it meant. Just answer this guys... was my and Green's deal in a PM? Does my # 1 sales thread rule not say that "take it" trumps PM's?

 

Thats the greatness of the boards... whoever wants to play it cheap and goes the PM route stands the chance to lose. The brave sole not afraid to pay the price listed should always win if he gets to the prize first... and with a "take it" , Mr. Kawfeadikt did win the prize.

Edited November 24, 2010 by Bio-Rupp

[Green]

I just don't get why he'd write back and say "Sold!" if the books weren't actually sold - that makes zero sense, Nick :shrug:

 

I know - this is a slightly challenging one. But when Bio-Rupp then made that second comment, couldn't Green have stated, "I'd rather not - why don't you mark it as sold" and this would be a non-issue?

 

Sold!

 

If you don't mind, please throw up the "Take It's" in both threads.

 

You sir, are awesome!

 

Many thanks

 

M

 

How long within the 15 minutes between that post and the thread post was it that Green had a chance to read that note? I think this is where the breakdown happened.

To be very honest i read it right when he typed. The books involved in the deal were from 3 seperate threads. I didnt think it was necessary since the books were 'sold'. i wanted to lay in bed and watch TV.

[faster friends]

Live and learn Everyone. There is about a Bizzilion more comics out there. Go shop for Secret Santa gifts!!!

[Bosco685]

I didnt think it was necessary since the books were 'sold'. i wanted to lay in bed and watch TV.

 

 

I think this was an oops with both parties. What could have occurred to make this go smoothly is:

 

1. Green could have either posted the TAKES IT's or asked Bio to mark them as sold.

 

2. Bio-Rupp could have either marked the books as sold or when the second buyer posted TAKE IT's, he could have stated there was a pending deal and he was just trying to confirm with the buyer.

 

I like both you guys, so please don't think I'm taking sides. I just see that as the scenarios that could have occurred now that more of the details have been provided.

[mschmidt]

I guess in a "perfect world", it wouldn't have been that big of a deal for Green to just go and put "take its" up as asked and as the rule states. Twisting the words for his benefit aren't going to get him what he lost fair and square.

There's no twisting of anything here ... Green posted an "I'll take it" in the PM to which you replied "Sold!".

If the sale was contingent on him posting separate "I'll take it"s in all three threads - which is a silly request - you should have said so. You didn't

[A-DONIS]

How much are we talking about here anyway?

[Green]

I want to be very clear that Kawfeaddikt should be left out of this completely. I have no intention of, nor did i ever have any intention of, infringing on his purchase once the seller honored the second sale of the books.

 

That being said i am still of the stern opinion that you backed out of deal that was in place.

 

And also, at some point you interpreted me as rude. At no point did i ever intend to be rude. In fact you quoted by far the rudest thing i said "Obviously i did mind" meanwhile i was dealing with condescending stuff like:

 

 

Sure I think I can help you understand...

 

This, what we are doing right now, is a "PM" which means "personal message"... do we agree on that?

 

Do we agree that we are talking to each other in a "personal message"?

 

I'm not trying to make this hard for you sir... but this is a PM right here.

 

 

 

The "take it" sign TRUMPS ALL PM'S .

 

Again if you want to take it to the boards for confirmation on what my rule is and how ANYONE else would read it... then by all means lets do it. I am QUITE CONFIDENT I am in the right here.

 

And this gem from today:

 

I'm guessing your lack of response has given you time to look up the words "trumps" and "PM" plus given you time to ask a few board buddies their opinion on my rules and clarification of them.

 

 

As politely as i can say it, i do not wish to do business with you at this point in time. I dont hold grudges. cya around.

[Bio-Rupp]

I want to be very clear that Kawfeaddikt should be left out of this completely. I have no intention of, nor did i ever have any intention of, infringing on his purchase once the seller honored the second sale of the books.

 

That being said i am still of the stern opinion that you backed out of deal that was in place.

 

And also, at some point you interpreted me as rude. At no point did i ever intend to be rude. In fact you quoted by far the rudest thing i said "Obviously i did mind" meanwhile i was dealing with condescending stuff like:

 

 

Sure I think I can help you understand...

 

This, what we are doing right now, is a "PM" which means "personal message"... do we agree on that?

 

Do we agree that we are talking to each other in a "personal message"?

 

I'm not trying to make this hard for you sir... but this is a PM right here.

 

 

 

The "take it" sign TRUMPS ALL PM'S .

 

Again if you want to take it to the boards for confirmation on what my rule is and how ANYONE else would read it... then by all means lets do it. I am QUITE CONFIDENT I am in the right here.

 

And this gem from today:

 

I'm guessing your lack of response has given you time to look up the words "trumps" and "PM" plus given you time to ask a few board buddies their opinion on my rules and clarification of them.

 

 

As politely as i can say it, i do not wish to do business with you at this point in time. I dont hold grudges. cya around.

 

FANTASTIC!

 

Guys the DC READER thead is NOW OPEN! Green it will be in our best interests for you to stay clear of any of my sales threads, I will not sell to you. Regardless I wish you the best.