• 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

oakman29

oakman29

Posted
Posted
I wish I was a turtle. :cloud9:

 

Speaking of which, do you have a solution for turtle infestations?

 

I recently watched a documentary where turtles enjoyed eating pizza.

 

I would set a trap using pizza as bait.

 

I've got a trap for that! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oakman29

oakman29

Posted
Posted

If more boardies could be as sanguine as you about issues, it'd be a calmer place. But probably less entertaining. :banana:

 

Thanks. (thumbs u

 

I like the idea that the coolest cat on the boards has the name "Dr. Chaos",

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I heard that Oakman character is pretty cool too! :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Logan510

Logan510

Posted
Posted

If more boardies could be as sanguine as you about issues, it'd be a calmer place. But probably less entertaining. :banana:

 

Thanks. (thumbs u

 

I like the idea that the coolest cat on the boards has the name "Dr. Chaos",

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I heard that Oakman character is pretty cool too! :whistle:

 

 

 

Maybe a couple of years ago, but what have you done for us lately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oakman29

oakman29

Posted
Posted

If more boardies could be as sanguine as you about issues, it'd be a calmer place. But probably less entertaining. :banana:

 

Thanks. (thumbs u

 

I like the idea that the coolest cat on the boards has the name "Dr. Chaos",

 

xxx ooo

 

Rupp

 

I heard that Oakman character is pretty cool too! :whistle:

 

 

 

Maybe a couple of years ago, but what have you done for us lately?

 

I'm such a Lazy . :sorry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
What the details are between a buyer and a seller is no one else's business. What's in the best interests of everyone is that it stays that way. A right to privacy is part of our constitution for a reason. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

 

Most people don't realize there's no express right to privacy in the Constitution.

 

We were a country for well over 100 years before court cases even hinted that there might be a right to be divined through cobbling pieces of the document together, but there's still nothing there that expressly gives us the right to privacy. It wasn't until the mid-60's that the supreme court came up with a way to say that married couples could use contraception in the privacy of their own home.

 

 

 

 

The right to privacy is a topic that has been discussed in the WC from time to time, from a 'big brother / government POV.

 

Some people believe the right to privacy shouldn't exist, the reasoning being that if you aren't doing something wrong you have nothing to worry about. I tend to agree although I also worry about corruption and misuse of that information.

 

But as far a comics go, it's an emotional hobby. We've probably all been bent out of shape over a deal at one point or another. I know l have unfortunately.

 

The problem, of course, is in the definition of "something wrong."

 

That's far, far, farrrrr too vague, and would be abused by those with an agenda.

 

We're already at the point of being criminals just by virtue of living, breaking some law in some code somewhere, all the time.

 

I would be happily tossed to the wolves by some here, for the sole "crime" of challenging them and their notions. How many people have openly called for others to be banned? Would that stop if those people had actual power? No, it would only be magnified, and people would be guillotined for telling truth to power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
InvstmntComcSuply

InvstmntComcSuply

Posted
Posted
As mentioned before, there are people here who have lost that ability, and it makes it very hard to pay them back for Artist fees, or grading fees, or any of the other "pass through" fees that Personal was intended for. They complain about the fee, but if they hadn't been chowderheads to begin with, they wouldn't have lost the ability.

 

Please explain why these "pass through" outlays which are out-of-pocket business expenses associated with someone (your friend) doing business and getting paid for doing it......is considered by you to be the same as paying back someone for lunch and not subject to fees?

 

:popcorn:

 

Artist charges $10 per sig. I get 20 books signed. Artist charges $200. Facilitator pays that $200.

 

That $200 is paid back by me to the Facilitator via Paypal personal, and has nothing to do with the charge the Facilitator may charge me for their service. The facilitator didn't make any money on that aspect of the situation. They simply paid the artist on my behalf.

 

That's one of the things Paypal personal is for, specifically, as defined.

 

 

No it is not.

Personal Payments are specifically defined in Paypal's T&Cs

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.

 

 

It's not about WHO you're sending money to that is the issue with Paypal...it is WHY you're sending money. That's why they don't bother with what someone's "friend" may be, and is this person a merchant, and is that person not a merchant, and all sorts of needlessly complex scenarios.

 

Of course it is about Who you are sending money to. That is why they reference using it for "friends and family" and specifically exclude payments "to or from a business"

 

The only reason they cover the WHY is due to people stretching the definition of "friends".

You will note that all of the examples they use, such as "Gift, Living Expense (like rent or utilities), Reimbursing a friend for your share of a restaurant check, or Repaying money that a family member loaned you" are in no way business expenses.

 

 

When I do work on someone's books, and they ask me to send the books to CGC on their behalf under my account, I ask for TWO payments: one for the CGC charges, which is a PERSONAL payment...and the other for MY services, which is a GOOD/SERVICE payment, for which I pay the fee.

 

When you are sending payments to facilitators and when your customers are sending payments to you, these transactions are business transactions, to and from a business.

 

That is not correct.

 

I am "paying a friend back" for payment they fronted me (as noted in the definition.) Just like the friend who pays for my share of lunch. Is a business the ultimate recipient? Yes. It is NOT a "purchase", because I am not buying something from these facilitators.

 

I am not buying goods and/or services from these facilitators for that portion of the money that goes to other entities. That payment, if any, for their services is a separate transaction, for their services, and yes, must be paid for the regular way.

 

It is correct

Unless you are claiming both:

1. that all the facilitators are your friends AND you are sending them money without a purchase. You fully admit there is a purchase involved, because you are splitting it out as payment for their business services

2. All your customers are your friends AND they are sending you money without purchases

Again you fully admit to being paid for work on their books and splitting out a portion of the transaction for CGC fees

 

In your situation, these are not "friends" nor are they examples of "your share of a lunch bill". You are acting as a business to your customers and your facilitators (who are also a business) and the payments made are integral portions of a business transaction. It seems clear that you are simply justifying your current position, based on when you used to do this for fun (ala comix4fun) when you actually would have met the terms and conditions laid out by Paypal.

 

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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
As mentioned before, there are people here who have lost that ability, and it makes it very hard to pay them back for Artist fees, or grading fees, or any of the other "pass through" fees that Personal was intended for. They complain about the fee, but if they hadn't been chowderheads to begin with, they wouldn't have lost the ability.

 

Please explain why these "pass through" outlays which are out-of-pocket business expenses associated with someone (your friend) doing business and getting paid for doing it......is considered by you to be the same as paying back someone for lunch and not subject to fees?

 

:popcorn:

 

Artist charges $10 per sig. I get 20 books signed. Artist charges $200. Facilitator pays that $200.

 

That $200 is paid back by me to the Facilitator via Paypal personal, and has nothing to do with the charge the Facilitator may charge me for their service. The facilitator didn't make any money on that aspect of the situation. They simply paid the artist on my behalf.

 

That's one of the things Paypal personal is for, specifically, as defined.

 

 

No it is not.

Personal Payments are specifically defined in Paypal's T&Cs

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.

 

 

It's not about WHO you're sending money to that is the issue with Paypal...it is WHY you're sending money. That's why they don't bother with what someone's "friend" may be, and is this person a merchant, and is that person not a merchant, and all sorts of needlessly complex scenarios.

 

Of course it is about Who you are sending money to. That is why they reference using it for "friends and family" and specifically exclude payments "to or from a business"

 

The only reason they cover the WHY is due to people stretching the definition of "friends".

You will note that all of the examples they use, such as "Gift, Living Expense (like rent or utilities), Reimbursing a friend for your share of a restaurant check, or Repaying money that a family member loaned you" are in no way business expenses.

 

 

When I do work on someone's books, and they ask me to send the books to CGC on their behalf under my account, I ask for TWO payments: one for the CGC charges, which is a PERSONAL payment...and the other for MY services, which is a GOOD/SERVICE payment, for which I pay the fee.

 

When you are sending payments to facilitators and when your customers are sending payments to you, these transactions are business transactions, to and from a business.

 

That is not correct.

 

I am "paying a friend back" for payment they fronted me (as noted in the definition.) Just like the friend who pays for my share of lunch. Is a business the ultimate recipient? Yes. It is NOT a "purchase", because I am not buying something from these facilitators.

 

I am not buying goods and/or services from these facilitators for that portion of the money that goes to other entities. That payment, if any, for their services is a separate transaction, for their services, and yes, must be paid for the regular way.

 

It is correct

Unless you are claiming both:

1. that all the facilitators are your friends AND you are sending them money without a purchase. You fully admit there is a purchase involved, because you are splitting it out as payment for their business services

 

I "fully admit" that there is sometimes a purchase involved, which is a separate transaction between myself and another party. The PURCHASE involved is the fee part. The paying them back is the Personal part. I don't always use Paypal to pay a facilitator's fees, but if I do, I use regular payments, as required. If, however, I am paying a facilitator for ARTIST fees, that is not going to the facilitator, and thus, isn't a purchase (<---operative word) from the facilitator.

 

2. All your customers are your friends AND they are sending you money without purchases

Again you fully admit to being paid for work on their books and splitting out a portion of the transaction for CGC fees

 

No, the "AND" isn't appropriate. If someone is sending me money without purchasing something, it falls under the definition of "Personal payment."

 

The operative phrase is "without a purchase."

 

The work I do = performing a service = "a purchase" by Paypal's definition.

 

Paying for CGC fees for them = not a service = not a purchase.

 

It's all pretty straightforward.

 

You seem stuck on the definition of "friend", but that's precisely why the language exists as it is: so that people don't claim everyone is their "friend."

 

They say without buying something.

 

When I pay CGC fees on someone else's behalf, they are not buying something from me. They are simply paying me back for money I loaned to them to buy something (in this case, CGC services) which is PRECISELY what Paypal says Personal payments are for:

 

"• Payment owed: to pay your friend back for your share of a dinner bill, or for another item that your friend bought for you."

 

In your situation, these are not "friends" nor are they examples of "your share of a lunch bill". You are acting as a business to your customers and your facilitators (who are also a business) and the payments made are integral portions of a business transaction. It seems clear that you are simply justifying your current position, based on when you used to do this for fun (ala comix4fun) when you actually would have met the terms and conditions laid out by Paypal.

 

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.

 

You've focused on the wrong thing, and skipped the most important part: "without a purchase..

 

Again....paying someone back for an advance they gave you is precisely what Personal was for. I am NOT "using it as a business manner in a way that benefits my business", unless you think I am somehow getting a cut of the CGC fees. I assure you, I am not.

 

As well, there are certain payments TO businesses (such as utilities) that are perfectly allowed.

 

Have you red the definitions from Paypal that I posted...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisco37

chrisco37

Posted
Posted
I think it would be fun to show a properly blurred out screen shot to validate my integrity. It would make the accusers eat crow. (shrug)

 

Dan

 

Did I miss where anyone has proof the seller did anything wrong?

 

Did someone PM and buy the book in 3 minutes? Maybe. Maybe not.

 

No one has any clue other than the seller and possible PM buyer. Everything else is speculation and hilariously embarrassing.

 

If the seller comes in this thread five minutes from now and says there was no PM buyer and he didn't want to sell it that low, oh well.

 

Trashing the thread, and the seller's reputation, on a supposition, regardless of what eventually comes out, is mind blowing and the epitome of self entitlement.

 

 

But it makes for some awesome chest thumping.

 

Nailed it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ttfitz

ttfitz

Posted
Posted

(Oh, and saying someone is stealing IS calling them a thief, literally by definition - "a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force". To say otherwise is being disingenuous.)

 

No, to say otherwise is to understand that one can steal, but not do it purposely. If I pop a grape into my mouth at the store without thinking about it, and without paying for it, have I stolen? Yes, obviously, by any definition of that word. I took something that didn't belong to me, and didn't compensate the owner for it. Did I do it purposely? No, and it's intent, not action, that makes one a thief.

 

 

Once again, BY DEFINITION, saying someone is stealing is calling them a thief.

 

Dictionary.com - "thief - a person who steals, especially secretly or without open force"

 

Oxforddictionaries.com - "thief - A person who steals another person’s property, especially by stealth and without using force or violence."

 

merriam-webster.com/dictionary - "thief - a person who steals something"

 

I would suggest that instead of feigning shock that someone was offended when they used the commonly understood definition of a word rather than your re-imagining of the same, if you don't want to be accusing someone of being a thief, you should refrain from saying they are stealing.

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