posted on October 30, 2000 03:40:36 PMRadh: from other threads that printseller has started or posted to, in my opinion she has an "interesting" take on things...
posted on October 30, 2000 06:13:10 PM
I took a look (from the outside only) at this site but there doesn't appear to be any way to "join" so I can LMAO.
How does one go about joining or does it involve taking some kind of blood oath?
posted on October 30, 2000 08:43:59 PM
blenda: thanks for the heads up.
eventer: i got sent the URL & password anonymously. i guess someone realllllly wanted me to read a buncha gossip, but i never went there; however, I might mention to you that I've subsequently been told that they think I am a Pink. Don't laugh toooooo hard if those posts are still around, I dunno!
posted on October 30, 2000 08:47:27 PM
How the heck do you get into the Ebay Detective Agency message board? Do you have to be invited to join or what? I would like to look at what is on those boards.
posted on October 30, 2000 09:25:01 PM
I haven't read or even looked at any of the Ebay Boards in a really, really looonnngggg time, but I was interested in this discussion.
For the life of me, I can't find an Ebay Trust and Safety Board, even on their Site Map. Could someone tell me in what general area I should be looking?
posted on October 31, 2000 01:06:54 AM
I'm against public accusations against a seller without reasonable proof (I won't debate the term reasonable). I'm for anyone or any group that can get a news service's attention to the issue of shilling on eBay.
Let me qualify this by saying I can offer no proof to this story of mine. It happened last May.
I looked at an auction because the seller had spammed the usenet with his listings. I noticed the first bid was probably too early to have been viewed in the listings and was from a zero feedback user, my first suspicion. When my cursor drifted over the seller's PayPal link I found what in my mind was reasonable proof the seller and buyer were working together, the email in the PayPal link was the same as the buyer's NOT the seller's. "AH GOTCHA!" was my reaction, and I reported this to SafeHarbor. The result of my invesitgation resulted in the seller canceling the buyer's bid with the excuse "Unable to contact via email". EBay sent me email saying the seller had been warned about future abuses. The auction wasn't canceled, the buyer wasn't NARU'd, and the seller wasn't NARU'd. Hard to believe, but this is my story.
If eBay won't take action and someone can show the news service proof of that GREAT!
posted on October 31, 2000 06:23:49 AM
For Printseller: Your post stating ". In New Jeresy, for example, the owner of an item may bid on their item at auction to prevent it for being sold at too low a price."
Uh.....where did you find THAT fairy tale? Please, be specific.
posted on October 31, 2000 06:53:54 AM
toyranch, you got to keep your nose out of peoples affair. I've never been to any of those boards to fine friends or alliances. Most of the time, all you find are online weirdos & clicks of people who spend way too much time online & get hyper whenever someone asks them a question.
posted on October 31, 2000 08:01:44 AM
COMIC. Amen, baby! It gets to be an obsession that people cannot control. Soon, clicks form and all innerhell breaks loose.
Best to keep your eye on casual chat and factual data.
That is what I try to do. (But have been sucked in once or twice)
posted on October 31, 2000 09:08:35 AM
I checked out the Ebay Detective Agency thing. The parts that actually discussed particular shill bidders were interesting and potentially helpful. I don't understand the rest of it though.....people seemed to be discussing a lot of people and personalities in a hysterical way (having long and cryptic discussions about people who didn't seem to be shill bidders but were members of the agency itself) and the way they were calling everyone who disagreed with them a shill bidder was kind of Gestapo-like. There was a vigilante-ish tone I REALLY thought was negative.....they may have good intentions but they look like they will all end up stabbing each other in the back like little kids! I've got too many auctions to write and list to bother getting upset at the cock-a-mamie opinions of people I don't know and will never meet. If they are saying things about some of you I advise you to consider the source and move on...who is going to care about their opinions when it's so obvious they are extremists.
I think people on BOTH sides of the Great Ebay Divide get WAY too caught up in eBay's "boards". It's like office politics....No thanks! I just do my work and go home to my real life, which, thankfully, includes other interests besides eBay.
posted on October 31, 2000 08:59:37 PM
I was wrongfully targeted and harassed by these morons. I am in the process of tracking down one individual who requested contact info for me and my girlfriend. Here's the story happened: My girlfriend, a single mom, regularly buys from thrift shops and swap meets. She has an excellent eye for items that sell on E-Bay, and usually takes in over $2500/mo. with NO help from me. Most of this money goes to pay for her daughter's private school tuition. Occasionally, she buys art-deco lamps, which I collect and LOVE. She would probably give me the lamps at her cost if asked but, to be fair, I tell her to place them up for auction and I will bid along with everyone else. I regularly bid on art-deco lamps and occasionally bid on her art-deco lamps when she lists one. Sometimes I win (and I pay her the auction price for the lamp) and sometimes I lose. Well, one or more of these so-called E-Bay 'detectives' must have lost on a lamp I was bidding on and came after us. Little did he know, I am a REAL detective, working for a county agency that tracks & prosecutes, among other things, on-line fraud. After he requested our contact information, I turned the tables on him, had my agency classify him as a "stalker", then issued a subpoena to his ISP. I will have his real name and address within a couple of weeks. Not sure what I will do, but he will certainly poop his pants when he get's a certified letter from me. Attn E-Bay "goon-squad": Be careful who you pick your fights with!!! Not 'schoonerdude' anywhere else but here, so lay off!
What ToyRanch is doing is not a witch hunt ... he's complaining because ... who appointed these folks?
Nobody did. They are simply filling a vacuum of power.
ebaY's 'marketplace' ranks among the world's largest cities in terms of people involved and there isn't one sworn police officer assigned to get the cheats.
ebaY is a private business and while they want things to stay 'under control' ... the definition of 'under control' is that no one is screaming about the fraud. Put another way, they are in 'denial' because the alternative ... bringing in an outside authority ... is the only real option. (Think of the bad PR Six Flags gets when they bringing in the police on Halloween night after "security" is ignored.)
Fraud ... specifically auction fraud ... is the most reported problem on the internet. Shilling behavior is so easy to do and so hard to detect that anyone who doesn't believe that it is rampant is basically in denial.
Radh suggests contacting the FBI. Get serious Radh.
I did on April 1, 1998 when a person was selling 20 $1,500 laptops on the now defunct auctionuniverse.com. I was working for that company at the time. I had arranged for the auction ... an obvious fraud -- we knew because the CC number was bogus and the telephone number given us by the seller was to the local newspaper's info line. People were lining up to bid on this bogus auction.
Do you think the FBI was interested? NO. Not enough money involved. Do you think the US Attorney as interested. NO again. Not a big enough fraud ... (The computers only had $500 bids at the time ... $10 grand.)
I actually called the local police in the northwest (Washington State) and got as far as the local precinct. Were they interested in persuing this and stinging this bogus seller. They took a little info and blew it off.
Here was an opportunity to nail a scum and the authorities were not interested because it would be difficult to make a case. If the locals in Washington State had arrested the guy, they'd had to pay me to come from GA to appear ... for a stupid little $10,000 fraud (It grew to $20,000 as the bids increased to near a grand per item by the time I posted all bidders and warned them not to complete the sale.)
Maybe law enforcement is more involved -- the incident I mentioned was over two years ago -- but they're dealing with limited resources and guys with guns ... and the crook in front of the computer is pretty benign.
The "detective agency" and possees and netcops will self-appoint themselves until the authorities step up to the plate and set up a special court system to administer justice effeciently across the nation.
Bottom line, though, the Constitution gives Congress the power to define the courts and their jurisdictions (and appeals from those courts.)
posted on October 31, 2000 09:48:02 PM
Heya George~
How's life over in the Yahoo! Posse's little Star Chamber?
[i]If you guys here in the ebaY forum didn't see that one, it's spread out over 5 boards, but a good slice of it is right over in the Yahoo! forum here.
George is a member of the Yahoo! Posse, although he says he's not very active.[/i]
Yeah, I have the facts straight. Actually though, now that the really vengeful ones have left to form what they call the 'Online Militia', where the 'General' considers all PowerSellers to be PowerShillers and you are not only guilty until proven innocent, but any innuendo supporting the possiblity of your guilt might be posted to a public forum, now that the dozen or so of them are gone... the folks that are left seem like decent people who really want to do the right thing.
We're talking about it. Who knows, it might turn into a good thing. A PUBLIC forum focused on HELPING rather than the "Yeee HAW, we bagged another one" mob mentality espoused by some members of the 'Posse', including the leader.
posted on October 31, 2000 09:48:18 PM
schoonerdude:
I agree, you shouldn't pay her cost for the item although that would be fair. Why not pay her cost plus 15 percent. That would also be fair and would compensate your girlfriend for her time and effort.
Shill bidding is a matter of 'intent.' As an officer you know that 'criminal intent' is an element of proving a crime.
Under the law it is murder for one person to take a gun from a table, point it at another person and pull the trigger and kill them.
By the same token, if the person pulling the trigger is a four year old, that child is not guilty of murder because under the law, a child of that age is not capable of forming 'criminal intent.'
If the person pulling the trigger is 21 years old, they may plea to a reduced charge -- involuntary manslaughter instead of murder -- if they can somehow convince a jury that their act was innocent. "I didn't know the gun was loaded."
If you bid on 5 auctions of your girlfriend's 500 auctions, as a juror, I could be convinced your actions were innocent. If on the other hand, you bid on 300 of your girlfriends 500 auctions ... I'd be inclined to believe your motivation was shilling.
Of course the way to avoid the entire issue is to pay your girlfriend a 'finder's fee' above the cost of the collectible lamps and keep them off the auction. That is the reasonable thing to do and avoids any suggestion of impropriety.
As far as your investigating the user for online stalking; I would encourage you to rethink your actions as that could be construed as abuse of office.
posted on October 31, 2000 10:07:22 PM
"neomax" - I only bid on my girlfriend's art-deco lamps and nothing else. She has many more items listed that are more/less expensive. Any moron who looks at my bidding history would plainly see I am not a schill. Paying her 15% is not compensation enough when some of her lamps go for almost $1000.00. I will continue to bid on her lamps as I have been and anyone who has anything to say about it can contact me directly, like a man.
"Abuse of Office"? Precisely!...did this guy, err...LOSER over-step his bounds when he requested our contact info? Yes. Did I over-step mine when I subpoenaed his ISP? YES and it felt good.
posted on October 31, 2000 10:19:59 PM
Well George, let me quote you.
-------------
A member of the club....yes. An active participant....no.
-------------
-------------
my "actions taken" number is still well below 100
-------------
I said you are a member, which is what you stated.
You said you are not an active participant, but then you said your "actions taken" number is well below 100.
That's somewhat confusing if you are not active, but you have "actions taken". I paraphrased 'not very active' out of that. Please explain the 'clear misrepresentation'.
posted on October 31, 2000 10:44:11 PM
I am a "member" of the Yahoo! club where the Posse posts, yes...and have been virtually from the club's beginning, but I don't think any Posse member would consider me a "member", because I have never posted an auction that needed to be NW'ed or NW'ed an auction posted there. In other words, I haven't done the work necessary to be a "member". My "actions taken" number is actually 17. I recently NW'ed another auction and received my exact "coup" count, as you put it. Every one of those 17 NW's were taken independently of "the posse". And no, I don't think the "count" feature is necessary...but then I explained all this to you on another forum...yet, you still try to take my statements out of context...maybe you should run for public office, Toy Ranch, you certainly have that "political method" down pat.
If I've earned any "fellowship" with the posse, it's been through my objective reporting of the facts, to dispute the absolutely wild allegations that have been put forth in this forum and elsewhere.
So, once again, I submit that you have tried to misrepresent the facts, Toy Ranch, but anytime you wish to debate the issues, I'm ready.
George
It's easy to "knock" a program....a lot harder to come up with a BETTER solution.
[ edited by gawooley on Oct 31, 2000 10:57 PM ]
posted on October 31, 2000 11:00:59 PM
Well, George, you said you're a member.
I don't know, I've not been there. I have to take your word for it. You didn't say before, that you don't think anyone else would consider you a member. That's beside the point anyway. You said you're a member. I said you said you're a member. If there's a misrepresentation in this, it's not by me.
I said you said you're not very active. I didn't go back and look up your post and quotes before I said that, I relied on memory. After you accused me of 'clear misrepresentation', I went back and looked it up. It's not 'clear misrepresentation', you said you're a member, you said you post there, but not often, you said your 'actions taken' was 'well below 100'. I don't know what you're doing George, I just know what you say. I may have gotten the wrong impression from what you said, but it's far from 'clear misrepresentation'.
This is one of the silliest discussions I've ever had on a message board.
posted on October 31, 2000 11:13:50 PM
I repeat: A member of the club, not a posse member! I haven't earned that right...nor did I have time to pursue it. There have been other members of the club that were not active in the "work" of the Posse. It's a totally separate entity...
George It's easy to "knock" a program....a lot harder to come up with a BETTER solution.
posted on October 31, 2000 11:22:26 PM
schoonerdude:
I don't doubt your innocence in the matter but it appears you do bid often enough on items by your girlfriend to raise the question.
The problem is that right now we don't have a 'sheriff' that takes complaints. Rather, there is a group of underlings who take complaints. There is no reporting of the number of complaints (like the uniform crime reports made by law enforcement nationwide) and there the resolution of the case is rarely reported.
Safeharbor is just not up to the task. Their position in the management heirarchy of ebaY is that of a section in the corporate security department. Their primary mandate is take complaints and, in the most obvious cases, act.
We all know they are not empowered to actively look for fraud or, more precisely, to police the site.
It has also been documented that if the favored are caught, their so-called "tickets are fixed," quietly.
Only rarely, and because of the actions of those who play netcop, do we hear any of this. Sometimes this is one step above backyard gossip and that is only because it is written and read by hundreds rather than whispered to just a single person. What Radh would call a meme.
At best, these 'netcops' are journalists exposing possible wrongdoing and informing the general auction using public of what they find. (BTW: I subscribe to the belief that one should not believe everything they read in the newspaper.)
Still, these folks have no authority whatsoever.
The truth is no one knows how often 'criminal shilling' occurs. What we all know is that it is quite easy to do and quite hard to detect.
What is needed is a credible, independent 'police' authority active in the market. Without it, folks will continue to lose confidence in the market.
Pointing fingers and throwing darts is not going to change that. Focusing on the issue as an industry-wide problem demanding resolution will change it.
posted on November 1, 2000 06:24:11 AM
The truest statement in this whole discussion is by neomax: "Shilling behavior is so easy to do and so hard to detect that anyone who doesn't believe it is rampant is basically in denial".
It is rampant, and I believe many people are in denial about it. Sellers, because they don't want the publicity to drive bidders away from eBay; and buyers, because many of them don't want to think they got suckered into paying more than they should have, or would have in a fair auction.
It is easy to spot the stupid shillers, and too often those are the only ones eBay does anything about. It is extremely difficult to do anything about the smart ones, because even if confronted, by eBay or some "detective", nothing can be proven: they have taken just enough precautions in their activities to give them the appearance of innocence. There won't be proof "beyond a reasonable doubt".
And when people want a list of ways to spot shillers, you set up a Catch 22 situation - you also teach the dishonest how to shill.
