3/5/2021 - Nominating nocutename for the Probation List 5 5

[porcupine48]

16 minutes ago, Funnybooks said:

I can’t unsee this...why is Chuck still standing there...watching?

We all have our kinks.

[CAHokie]

11 minutes ago, Bio-Rupp said:

2) In a perfect sale, would I be exempt from the PL list if she paid the $12 and I didn't follow through and send her the book? It's only $12.

You would be on there so fast your head would spin!

[Bird]

9 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

We all have our kinks.

lucy is mad because that is her brother

[Bio-Rupp]

1 minute ago, CAHokie said:

You would be on there so fast your head would spin!

I know right   

Red makes a valid point... but when it gets turned around like this, it becomes pretty easy to see.

xxx ooo

Rupp

[Red84]

26 minutes ago, Bio-Rupp said:

And just so you know, I mean no disrespect to you for not agreeing with your take on this.

I do get where you're coming from 

Now I need answers ! 

1) Would you warn Hollywood about Dave?

2) In a perfect sale, would I be exempt from the PL list if she paid the $12 and I didn't follow through and send her the book? It's only $12.

3) Seriously...how about me giving you my address, and you sending me ...again, it's only $12 

xxx ooo

Rupp

1) they don't need a warning because you were not out anything. You still had the book (until you gave it away for some baffling reason)

2) you would go on the Probation List for theft. Here, she did not steal from you.

3) you don't need it. It's just $12.  

[Bio-Rupp]

1 minute ago, Red84 said:

1) they don't need a warning because you were not out anything. You still had the book (until you gave it away for some baffling reason)

2) you would go on the Probation List for theft. Here, she did not steal from you.

3) you don't need it. It's just $12.  

I see a future for you in government 

All good answers that can go either way.

No she didn't steal from me... she broke her word...which oddly makes it seem worse  

xxx ooo

Rupp 

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

2 hours ago, Red84 said:

Putting her on the Probation List over $12 devalues and diminishes the List

Why?

How the heck do you work that one out?  So we have a threshold on transaction amounts?

Let's call it a $100.

All complaints can only be over a $100 transaction...., but if it's below that, have at it scammers!

Let' get it written into the rules 

You need to seriously re-think what you are saying.

 

[Iceman399]

I'm waiting for Red84 to post a link to a video....being like fooled you just wanted to get you guys going.

 

[Bio-Rupp]

21 minutes ago, Bio-Rupp said:

I see a future for you in government 

All good answers that can go either way.

No she didn't steal from me... she broke her word...which oddly makes it seem worse  

xxx ooo

Rupp 

One other thing @Red84 ,

I don't think the PL is here specifically for "theft".

I believe it's for a multitude of things all relating to incomplete transactions involving merchandise and/or tender provided by either buyer, seller, or trader...usually in conjunction with the use of the  emoji or some other acceptance of terms.

You don't have to be out anything to be part of an incomplete transaction.

xxx ooo

Rupp

[porcupine48]

48 minutes ago, Bird said:

lucy is mad because that is her brother

WE.ALL.HAVE.OUR.KINKS!

(and with that I gotta say,must be step bro-p'hub tells me that's okay and normal,right)

[Bio-Rupp]

4 minutes ago, Iceman399 said:

I'm waiting for Red84 to post a link to a video....being like fooled you just wanted to get you guys going.

 

Have you seen the 4K restoration of this video on YouTube?

Good lord it looks like it was made yesterday  

xxx ooo

Rupp

[porcupine48]

5 minutes ago, Iceman399 said:

I'm waiting for Red84 to post a link to a video....being like fooled you just wanted to get you guys going.

 

You want a link?I'll give you a link 

 

 

[KCOComics]

To me this situation is pretty black and white. Regardless of the amount of money @Bio-Rupp stated the rules, she took a book, which means she agreed to those rules and then she backed out. 

I would be more empathetic if she didn't have similar issues with @Bird 

@Bio-Rupp even offered alternative solutions and gave her opportunities to clear this up when most everyone else had written her off.

[crassus]

1 hour ago, speedcake said:

Dude, she'd come right off the list if she either agreed to pay the $12 she said she would for the comic, or the extra lousy $4 over the amount she claimed would be reasonable for shipping.

She'd come right back off the list.

It's not a permanent list.

No one is getting a scarlet letter branded on their forehead.

Wtf are rules for if we don't expect people to follow them or to be reasonable?

I feel at this point you are just trolling and adding nothing of substance to the discussion. You've said your piece. Enough already.

Let me say first that I respect you both as Boardies making a contribution, but @speedcake you need to respect @Red84 on this, albeit you have every right to disagree with him, when he posts that he "normally takes probation nominations seriously" he most certainly does and has often involved himself to very good purpose, and he's entitled to his opinion, and the PL forum is imo much better off (and in fact usually benefits) for having contrary opinions to keep everyone honest. 

[Red84]

48 minutes ago, Bio-Rupp said:

One other thing @Red84 ,

I don't think the PL is here specifically for "theft".

I believe it's for a multitude of things all relating to incomplete transactions involving merchandise and/or tender provided by either buyer, seller, or trader...usually in conjunction with the use of the  emoji or some other acceptance of terms.

You don't have to be out anything to be part of an incomplete transaction.

xxx ooo

Rupp

It's not. As I mentioned before, what Rick Starr did qualifies for the PL because he deprived the buyer out of the "benefit of the bargain" by refusing to honor the sale and then selling it elsewhere for a larger sum of money.

Like I have said, repeatedly, what nocutename did QUALIFIES for the probation list; I just don't think a transaction for $12 is WORTHY of the list and I would not have raised it, especially when she backed out before you had shipped.

[Red84]

1 hour ago, G G ® ™ said:

Why?

How the heck do you work that one out?  So we have a threshold on transaction amounts?

Let's call it a $100.

All complaints can only be over a $100 transaction...., but if it's below that, have at it scammers!

Let' get it written into the rules 

You need to seriously re-think what you are saying.

 

No one was scammed here.

She backed out before anything was shipped. She was wrong, but bio didn't lose anything (except when he inexplicably gave the book away as a freebie).

In terms of the dollar amount, it's $12.

But if she had stolen $12, then I'd be all for adding her to the list.

I don't hold her responsible for @Bio-Rupp giving the book away. She had just shown him that her word was no good, and then he immediately relied on her (clearly angry) follow up to give the book away. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

She gained nothing; and he was out nothing.

[speedcake]

24 minutes ago, crassus said:

Let me say first that I respect you both as Boardies making a contribution, but @speedcake you need to respect @Red84 on this, albeit you have every right to disagree with him, when he posts that he "normally takes probation nominations seriously" he most certainly does and has often involved himself to very good purpose, and he's entitled to his opinion, and the PL forum is imo much better off (and in fact usually benefits) for having contrary opinions to keep everyone honest. 

that's fine. But post after post after post saying the same thing over and over again that its "just $12 bucks NBD get over it" is adding what exactly to this particular discussion?

He's posting as if his is the ONLY opinion and that the rest of us are out of line if we disagree.

Edited March 8, 2021 by speedcake

[Domo Arigato]

13 minutes ago, Red84 said:

She had just shown him that her word was no good....

Which is exactly why the probation list is warranted.

A pattern has developed......one that's been allowed to propagate.

How has it been allowed to propagate?  By people making excuses for it and there being no consequences.  

It's only $12 this time.......it's was only $3 in the MCS thread.......Bird was a new seller and wasn't sure why she was flipping out so much....where does it end?

Negative actions......especially repeated negative actions......should have consequences. 

If they don't.....the negative actions will continue.

 

[Randall Dowling]

Again, at the risk of aggravating people, I have to say that context matters.  Scale matters.  I'm in no way saying that @Bio-Rupp is wrong.  But others have compared the $12 transaction to a $1000 transaction and they are not the same.  If you think that, then you must also think that this whole thing would be worth while over 5 cents (looking at you and your dirty comic, Jimmers! ).

And if you say, yes, I would be just as upset over 5 cents as I would over $1000, well, okay, that's fine.  I think you may be wound a bit tight but to each their own.  

But I want to be clear, @Bio-Rupp is definitely in the right here.  That doesn't always make it worthwhile to pursue.  At this point, put her on the list and move on (after whatever steps are required according to board rules).  Also, I think you guys are being awfully hard on @Red84.  As @crassus said, you may disagree but he's still entitled to his opinion.  Especially if it agrees with mine.  Jus' sayin'.  

[Bio-Rupp]

37 minutes ago, Red84 said:

It's not. As I mentioned before, what Rick Starr did qualifies for the PL because he deprived the buyer out of the "benefit of the bargain" by refusing to honor the sale and then selling it elsewhere for a larger sum of money.

Like I have said, repeatedly, what nocutename did QUALIFIES for the probation list; I just don't think a transaction for $12 is WORTHY of the list and I would not have raised it, especially when she backed out before you had shipped.

I understand your point but there is nothing in the probation rules that states a $12 transaction isn't "worthy". 

I do realize that is just your opinion and others should know that by now as well.

Her taking the merch off the sales floor a week before the sale ended also means there is a possibility I could have sold it to someone else, thereby depriving me the benefit  of making money from it.  Similar to the Rick issue, just less. A lot less, but the possibility of loss still remains doesn't it?  It can't sell if it's not available to sell.

Two board posts, one from 2007, the other from 2011 concerning PL nominations.

1) The 30 day rule specifically states "transactions" btw board members.  It doesn't state $1 or $1,000 transactions...just transactions.

2) The first post from 2007 start of a probationary thread is based solely on unpaid .  It does not provide a monetary amount to rise to for it to be valid.

This is what I go by and what I follow.

I agree 100% with you that both the  Comical situation and the nocutename could have resulted in better outcomes.

Do you know what they had in common?

  Both took no responsibility for their posted 's...and TOLD me what they were going to do. 

I wasn't asked anything in either of these cases.  Neither wanted to discuss options.

  I just don't play that game...especially when I go to great lengths to make sure everyone knows the sales thread terms.  

  If both would have taken a different approach instead of the  "IM THE BUYER, IM RIGHT" route...then I can guarantee to you I would have GLADLY worked with them both, and we wouldn't be here now. 

xxx ooo

Rupp

Edited March 8, 2021 by Bio-Rupp
Spelling dang it