Nominating RICK STARR 10 10

[Ryan.]

2 minutes ago, G G ® said:

If I had a check for $1900 already sent and floating about, I would not be offering to send another one and offering paypal either until some decent period of time had elapsed.

Just sayin'.

What are you inferring? 

[(G-G © ® ™) Paul]

Just now, Ryan. said:

What are you inferring? 

I'm saying that we have one side of the story here. Not two. 

[Callaway29]

D*ick move in my opinion. I had a seller/dealer sell a book out from under me while wire transfer was in-progress earlier this month, but it wasn't on the boards. I will never do business with him again. Agree we need both sides of the story, but if the veteran/new board member had reversed roles in this....I don't think so many people would be running to the new guy's defense. Why should vets be held to a lower standard? Again, I have a feeling the other side of the story may highlight some relevant facts though...

[thewritestuff]

20 minutes ago, G G ® said:

You also have to take into account the seller's angle here. He waits two weeks for the money which was supposedly coming, and sees nothing. Perhaps that annoyed him. It would annoy me.

We've only got one side here, obviously we need the seller to chime in before everyone gets their pitchforks out for polishing.

I can post our entire chain of communication if that’s necessary, but I offered several times to send a replacement check or send payment by another means. It was John, the seller, who told me several times to wait for the check to arrive.

He clearly states two things: he made enough money on the thread, so he did not “need” my payment, and that it was after the two weeks (again, it was two weeks because he chose to wait that long) he suddenly realized he couldn’t live without that one book, out of all the others he sold in that thread.

Would he have made the same choice and given the same responses if the buyer had been a longtime boardie/bigwig? I’ll let you all decide... 

Edited October 28, 2020 by thewritestuff

[comicdonna]

BTW, all the buyer has to do is sell him the book and this ends.  It should come down to which is more important to him.  Probation list or the book.

[(G-G © ® ™) Paul]

2 minutes ago, thewritestuff said:

Would he have made the same choice and given the same responses if the buyer had been a longtime boardie/bigwig? I’ll let you all decide... 

This is why he needs to respond. because it's all assumption until he does.

[(G-G © ® ™) Paul]

1 minute ago, comicdonna said:

BTW, all the buyer has to do is sell him the book and this ends.  It should come down to which is more important to him.  Probation list or the book.

Who says it's PL worthy?

[october]

23 minutes ago, Foolkiller said:

I would not put John on the probation list.  couple of things:

1) if he had not received the check (and I do think he deserves the benefit of the doubt that it didn't especially if it wasn't cashed) in a timely fashion, he'd have the right to cancel the sale for whatever reason.  According to this, it was two weeks at which time he basically said, I didn't get it etc. and now I've decided I don't want to sell it.

2) I do agree with the sentiment that this is not so egregious that a probation list nomination is worthy and I do think some consideration should go to those who've had many, many, many successful transactions and the infraction is very minor.

3) All that said, I have no reason to doubt the buyer either in that he sent the check and this is disappointing and frustrating.  Some other accommodation or perhaps something else offered might have been a way to smooth it over.  

Regardless, I wouldn't put him on the probation list.

The USPS is extremely slow right now. A buyer mailed a check to me three weeks ago and it still hasn't landed. Very little is running on time, not even Priority Some latitude on when payment arrives should be expected, especially if the check was by the seller's request. 

[KPR Comics]

26 minutes ago, G G ® said:

So a person makes a bad call once after years of trading and is put on the list immediately?

No-one is allowed a Mulligan? Every one is allowed a blip. There's no history of persistent skullduggery here. There have been a lot worse things here go unpunished.

I would say that a thread like this serves as it's own punishment as people will read all the opinions and responses and make their own informed decision, going forward.

It's not a mistake, e.g., he inadvertently sold to another buyer.  From the facts presented, it was a deliberate action.  No one is forcing him to sell the book, but the consequences are being added to the list.  As for this thread serving as punishment, I don't see many people spending the time to find and read this thread months, years down the road.  The list makes the diligence process easier.   I would like to hear from the other side, however.

[thewritestuff]

4 minutes ago, G G ® said:

Who says it's PL worthy?

What is probation for if not a deterrent against similar behavior in the future, and also to alert my fellow members that the same could happen to them?

[(G-G © ® ™) Paul]

1 minute ago, thewritestuff said:

What is probation for if not a deterrent against similar behavior in the future, and also to alert my fellow members that the same could happen to them?

Agreed, but you claimed the book on Oct 11. It's only 17 days ago. Last time I checked Pl noms have to be at least a month from POS,or has this changed?

Regardless of the circs, that in itself is a breach of the rules.

The guy has a right to reply before the mob light their torches and burn down his barn.

[thewritestuff]

8 minutes ago, G G ® said:

This is why he needs to respond. because it's all assumption until he does.

I alerted him to my nomination twice. The original nomination was posted the other day under probation discussions, and it was the result of that (much longer) post that a respected boardie suggested I post a separate thread.

[crassus]

Just now, G G ® said:

Agreed, but you claimed the book on Oct 11. It's only 17 days ago. Last time I checked Pl noms have to be at least a month from POS,or has this changed?

Regardless of the circs, that in itself is a breach of the rules.

The guy has a right to reply before the mob light their torches and burn down his barn.

"c) The 30-day rule is suspended if the accused refuses to complete the transaction or if the transaction cannot be completed due to, for example, the item being sold to someone else."

[thewritestuff]

1 minute ago, G G ® said:

Agreed, but you claimed the book on Oct 11. It's only 17 days ago. Last time I checked Pl noms have to be at least a month from POS,or has this changed?

Regardless of the circs, that in itself is a breach of the rules.

The guy has a right to reply before the mob light their torches and burn down his barn.

I was told by another member that the seller’s flat out refusal to sell the book/complete the transaction negated any waiting period. 
 

 

[(G-G © ® ™) Paul]

1 minute ago, crassus said:

"c) The 30-day rule is suspended if the accused refuses to complete the transaction or if the transaction cannot be completed due to, for example, the item being sold to someone else."

Thanks for the clarification.

[crassus]

The 30 day rule applies in circumstances where somebody is "wudda cudda shudda" trying to get it done, and so 30 days is seen as a reasonable amount of time to get a normative transaction completed. Beyond 30 days, its assumed the wronged party has been sufficiently patient with excuses and mishaps and its now time to call out the other party. 

[JollyComics]

16 minutes ago, october said:

The USPS is extremely slow right now. A buyer mailed a check to me three weeks ago and it still hasn't landed. Very little is running on time, not even Priority Some latitude on when payment arrives should be expected, especially if the check was by the seller's request. 

Same thing here. Catrick339 waited my check for over two weeks. We stayed to communicate each other to follow up.  Time had flied by and I informed him that I was going to mail him other check but on the same day, Rickster got my check.  Everything was settled.  The communication is a key for being the teamwork.  I am very surprised thewritestuff and Rick Starr bought my books recently. Both are great.  Hopefully, both of you will work out rather than they are ending up here.

[crassus]

11 minutes ago, G G ® said:

The guy has a right to reply before the mob light their torches and burn down his barn.

Just want to say absolutely yes, I think everybody would like to get both sides of the story. That said, rights have to be exercised, and nobody is stopping him from coming here and posting in his own defense with his side of the story. But he has to care enough to want to do that, and it is not something others can do for him. I will be honest that I am surprised by this situation too. 

[the blob]

People still send paper checks via snail mail? Was that part of the terms of the sale to avoid some fee? Cancelling the check costs what, like $30? I'd be irritated about doing that more than not getting a book.

 

[october]

1 minute ago, the blob said:

People still send paper checks via snail mail? Was that part of the terms of the sale to avoid some fee? Cancelling the check costs what, like $30? I'd be irritated about doing that more than not getting a book.

 

Plenty of people dislike PayPal, myself included.

Paying via regular PP on that purchase would have cost the seller $57 for their "services". Screw. That.