• 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.

General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean
29 29

Started by Transplant,

35,153 posts in this topic

divad

divad

Posted
Posted
And just as a suggestion, the two of you should move on from this.

 

Between the "I'LL TAKE IT" thread in Comics General and the new Bio-Rupp sales thread in Gold/Silver/Bronze, you're both busting each other's chops.

 

Let's get back to talking about important things, like who's shilling their auctions and whether or not Ryan Reynolds will destroy the Green Lantern franchise before it even kicks off.

 

:ohnoez:

 

GL was always a second-tier character, is now, and will remain so. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
I cannot believe what I am reading here. The concept of :takeit: over PMs has been a long tradition here.

 

Anyone disagree?

 

 

Yep. Whole-heartedly. The seller posts the rules in his thread. A deal made is a deal made - that "rule" pre-dates our existence. :sumo:

 

Happy Thanksgiving, btw - back to the stuffing . . . :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
You picked the wrong time to be black and white Roy. Your analysis is flawed. The language that the Ill Take It trumps any and all PMs is not ambiguous. They had a PM deal. That PM deal was, by its very nature subject to being trumped by an Ill Take it in the thread, which it was. The way for Green to make his deal untrumpable was to post the Ill Take It in the thread. He chose not to at his own peril.

 

The takeaway that I have from this is that sellers should manage their sales threads as vigilantly as is possible. Had it been my thread, I would have gone and posted the Ill take IT myself ASAP to avoid what happened.

 

Since the seller clearly ( :insane: ) states " :takeit: trumps any and all PMs" I took that to mean any discussions via PM, while you take it to mean any :takeit: via PM.

 

Since that portion of the description is not clear it's up to interpretation.

 

What is clear is that the seller did not specify that an " :takeit: on the thread" trumps all other :takeit: posts, so any :takeit: by default trumps all...it trumps discussions, and it definitely trumps any other :takeit: whether by PM or on the thread.

 

Furthermore, the seller himself (who is the QB of his own thread) gave it the gold stamp of approval when he stated to Green that the item was Sold!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted
[Where does the seller specify that the "takeit" needs to be in the actual thread?

 

Green posted a "takeit" in the PM (which was the first "takeit" posted), and the seller replied "Sold!". Are you telling me that you wouldn't think the sale was a done deal at that point?

 

What does "- First :takeit: gets it and trumps any and all PM's." indicate to you? And I stress the "any and all PMs".

 

Again - "any and all PMs". So even if a PM includes an :takeit:, exactly where can that :takeit: BE in order to supercede "any and all PMs"?

 

There are literally hundreds posts, if not more, that are scattered across the forums talking about "first :takeit: vs a PM" and the plehtora of posts reading " :takeit: pending PM".

 

Suppose I buy a book listed at "100.00" and I send the seller 98.07. The seller says "You owe me 1.93". I say "I am assuming your asking price is in Australian Dollars because no where in the thread does it specify American dollars.

 

Would you support me in this?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
Suppose I buy a book listed at "100.00" and I send the seller 98.07. The seller says "You owe me 1.93". I say "I am assuming your asking price is in Australian Dollars because no where in the thread does it specify American dollars.

 

Would you support me in this?

 

Although this would be a rare situation, it brings up a good point.

 

6. It must list specific books with purchase prices. It is acceptable to bulk price, and/or to note that package discounts may be available, but you must list a starting price that you WILL sell for.

 

Where does it say in the board rules all prices are USD unless specified otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

Suppose I buy a book listed at "100.00" and I send the seller 98.07. The seller says "You owe me 1.93". I say "I am assuming your asking price is in Australian Dollars because no where in the thread does it specify American dollars.

 

Would you support me in this?

 

Pov, you make a good point about assumption.

 

Because I will hold a book during discussion via PM if someone asks me to, my perception when I read Biorupp's terms was that any :takeit: would trump a discussion via PM.

 

Someone else may have a different POV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Green

Green

Posted
Posted
[Where does the seller specify that the "takeit" needs to be in the actual thread?

 

Green posted a "takeit" in the PM (which was the first "takeit" posted), and the seller replied "Sold!". Are you telling me that you wouldn't think the sale was a done deal at that point?

 

What does "- First :takeit: gets it and trumps any and all PM's." indicate to you? And I stress the "any and all PMs".

 

Again - "any and all PMs". So even if a PM includes an :takeit:, exactly where can that :takeit: BE in order to supercede "any and all PMs"?

 

There are literally hundreds posts, if not more, that are scattered across the forums talking about "first :takeit: vs a PM" and the plehtora of posts reading " :takeit: pending PM".

 

Suppose I buy a book listed at "100.00" and I send the seller 98.07. The seller says "You owe me 1.93". I say "I am assuming your asking price is in Australian Dollars because no where in the thread does it specify American dollars.

 

Would you support me in this?

hm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mschmidt

mschmidt

Posted
Posted

Suppose I buy a book listed at "100.00" and I send the seller 98.07. The seller says "You owe me 1.93". I say "I am assuming your asking price is in Australian Dollars because no where in the thread does it specify American dollars.

 

Would you support me in this?

 

Pov, you make a good point about assumption.

 

Because I will hold a book during discussion via PM if someone asks me to, my perception when I read Biorupp's terms was that any :takeit: would trump a discussion via PM.

 

Someone else may have a different POV.

 

That's exactly how I read it as well - a :takeit: is a :takeit: no matter where it's posted, unless the seller specifically states that only "takeit"'s posted in the thread are valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
8milemax

8milemax

Posted
Posted
Given the guidelines:

 

- First takeit.gif gets it and trumps any and all PM's.

 

Would you consider the following to be a sale? It is a PM but the rules dont specify where the :takeit: has to be.

 

188c90c5.jpg

 

i did not go back and place the :takeit:s in all the different threads but i certainly had considered it a sale.

 

Just for arguments sake who would consider this a sale?

 

Looks like Bio droped the ball on this one? Maybe Green should try to put him in the probation list
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peter Loves Gwen

Peter Loves Gwen

Posted
Posted
I cannot believe what I am reading here. The concept of :takeit: over PMs has been a long tradition here.

 

 

Love you Pov, but I disagree.

 

:takeit: via timestamp is the most logical in my books.

 

The seller's inability to manage the thread is what caused this problem.

 

When the seller said "Sold!" that should have been the final word...even if not everyone heard it.

 

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

 

First :takeit: 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:

 

This. (thumbs u

 

You did not clearly specify in the thread rules that an :takeit: on the thread takes precedence.

 

Furthermore, I understand you were busy packaging people's wins but that doesn't take precedence over you managing your thread.

 

I'm not picking sides, the sides have already been chosen by the rules that were laid out by the seller and the seller's statement of "sold".

 

Once Green met your demands and you PMd back "sold" the deal was done. Handshake complete. Papers signed. No turning back.

 

Those are the hard facts. Anything else is just smoke and mirrors.

 

 

I think Roy has best described the way a sale thread should operate.

I agree that a time stamp should be the deciding factor for I'll Take It posts that happen near together.

 

I have not read that initial post in the thread discussed here, and don't want to just come down on either side.

 

It doesn't make sense to have a sale where people invest time and effort into making deals anywhere away from the thread,

and a thread post afterwords kills that deal. I don't mind people wanting to be more subtle or secretive in their deals,

I can work with that(and have). The rules must be clear(to all) in the thread's first post, then we can all work with them.

 

I will say that this is a good lesson for all future sales threads. I will make sure that I always clearly declare how a deal is sealed,

and how it trumps any other offers. For me that means any I'll Take It posted anywhere, with a verifiable time stamp is suitable.

I will state that in my first thread post, and keep the thread updated as well as possible. Regards,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
8milemax

8milemax

Posted
Posted (edited)
Looks like Bio droped the ball on this one? Maybe Green should try to put him in the probation list

lol

 

Oh nooooo - you don't hold any grudges.

 

:eyeroll:

 

It's not a grudge at all. He sold it to green then sold it to someone else! Whats so hard to understand. I read the whole thing and Bio was wrong and his attitude towards Green is also wrong. I don't even hold a grudge against you (thumbs u

Edited by 8milemax
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
Looks like Bio droped the ball on this one? Maybe Green should try to put him in the probation list

lol

 

Oh nooooo - you don't hold any grudges.

 

:eyeroll:

 

It's not a grudge at all. He sold it to green then sold it to someone else! Whats so hard to understand. I read the whole thing and Bio was wrong and his attitude towards Green is also wrong. I don't even hold a grudge against you (thumbs u

 

All this situation has done is brought a strong education to the overall forum (even Green will tell you this) that too many different standards are going around concerning what confirms a sale. And the opinions being brought to bear in this situation especially proves this out.

 

What you interpret as cut-and-dry seems to be a different cut-and-dry for others. Bio-Rupp told Green SOLD, but then included a polite request for him to post a TAKE IT in each thread to confirm the deal. Green, in his own words, read this and decided not to do it, but rather went to watch TV because I believe he is taking medicine right now and felt he needed to lay down.

 

It sounds like the ball was dropped on both sides. So how do you toss out there putting Bio-Rupp on the probation list with this situation?

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
29 29
Go to topic listing