posted on February 20, 2001 12:14:02 PM new
ironking
I don't understand your comment? Do you think the seller should be able to keep the money as a gift, is that your opinion? I respect your right to your opinion, and I am not criticizing it. Just puzzled by what you meant?
posted on February 20, 2001 01:21:22 PM new
katz032851
If you are bidding just according to FB quota, you picked the wrong one. This is not my seller ID. I have a 231+, from all sites. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the question posted on this thread. I did not insinuate anything. I asked would this "Term" be acceptable? Please do not follow the thinking of those on here trying to make my question what it isn't. They have their own crosses to bear. If such a seller kept your money, as a "gift", because you errored in the required info, would this be acceptable to you?
Mint
typo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[ edited by mint4you on Feb 20, 2001 01:23 PM ]
posted on February 20, 2001 01:46:30 PM newjimhhow
"Yes, they go posting warnings and links when they have no evidence or even supposition that any wrong was committed."
Show me in 'any context' where I posted "warnings" about this auction. I stated in the Sellers Zone as to make members aware of such "Terms". There are also 'buyers' in that club. That is a totally different comment, that you are trying to tag to me. For a person who cries out about defamation, you do plenty of it yourself. Best to think more carefully before attributing comments to me, that I did not make.
Mint
posted on February 20, 2001 05:24:56 PM new
To all of you who posted responses to my thread, in a non-attacking way, I am very grateful. The vast majority confirm what I believe to be an unacceptable "term" when posting auctions. I also appreciate the fact you did not turn on each other, and try to force your opinions on others, or to your way of thinking. The person who saw fit to accuse me of falsely attributed comments, has a problem he needs to address. I do, however, consider the source. We have all dealt with such comments on AW before. Being entitled to state your opinion is one thing, attacking those who are of differing views, is certainly uncalled for.
posted on February 20, 2001 06:41:24 PM new
Mint4u - I just read your response to my post informing me that I didn't respond to what the thread was for. Well, when I read through the comments I determined that there was pretty much a consensus that no one should keep money that doesn't belong to them. I agree with the majority, to keep money for "punishment" sake is unacceptable. We should find ways to create good will not anamosity. I also noted that the threads were starting to take on a "defensive" air on the part of some respondants. I responded to the thread in an oblique way sharing how I try to avoid receiving money for unidentified items. It seems to me I saw a few comments to this problem written by others in this thread and felt it was fair game to share my methods. Forgive me if I didn't respond correctly at this time.
posted on February 20, 2001 06:49:41 PM new
dreamgirl
Your views are always welcomed, at all times. I appreciate them, and this recent post I am know replying to. This discussion was very eye opening, as to how some perceive terms, such as these. I hope you will continue to post your opinions, in any thread which I may generate, for future discussions.
posted on February 20, 2001 06:57:05 PM new"Being entitled to state your opinion is one thing, attacking those who are of differing views, is certainly uncalled for."
I was just made aware of this attempt to 'lock' this thread. This is what I meant above. Persons of differing views, who can not accept such views, should not attempt to force their views on others, or 'lock' the thread to prevent those views.
posted on February 20, 2001 07:45:17 PM new
Hello Everyone,
This topic is brought up as a hypothetical and no I.D.'s have been mentioned. Please treat the subject as hypothetical as we cannot moderate what is said on other boards.
Differing opinions make for a lively discussion and there is absolutely no reason for personal comments.
Thanks for your cooperation in sticking to the subject.
posted on February 21, 2001 06:24:21 AM new
Hello Joice, (Moderator)
Thanks for your input, I appreciate your making that point. This was posted as a hypothetical, even though it may have been posted in other venues. I was hoping a moderator would step in and clarify that intention, for those who did not see it that manner.
posted on February 21, 2001 05:25:03 PM new
I understood exactly what you were saying and
NO WAY!! would those terms be acceptable to me. Therefore, I would bypass that sellers auctions with a click of the finger and a loud PFFFFFFFT!! Pretty nervy, if you ask me.
A scammer could always "make up" an infraction of his rules & make $$ without ever delivering a product! Sometimes I get disgusted too when having to search for more info when a payment comes in, but that's part of dealing with people in the real world. Just my 2¢.
posted on February 21, 2001 08:01:10 PM new
heyheyjan
Thanks very much for your input into this thread. Your two cents is always worth the time to type, and read. This issue is such, that occasionally it needs to be discussed. It gives us all awareness of what we should, or shouldn't say in our terms, that may impact our sales.
