MYSTIC 18 CGC 1.8
6 6

214 posts in this topic

26,580 posts
4 minutes ago, skypinkblu said:

I'm sorry to have to write something Grantley, I bit my tongue and erased a few times, but I meant what I said.

 

What you said was most helpful and illuminating Sharon. Particularly the bit about the stolen books.  Everything happens/does not happen for a reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,516 posts
21 minutes ago, MustEatBrains said:

Lesson learned, I guess.  No offense but I still find it troubling how @Columbia Comics put forth a false narrative of what looks to have actually happened.  He seemed to be stating facts you gave him then you come on and say "assumed".  If you gave CC bad info on how things went down he's probably owed an apology from you.

I've spoken to Pablo on the phone a couple of times and the only piece of info that was misunderstood on my end was the PM asking for the take it in the thread.  Apparently that was sent to Omaha and not GG.  So that piece of info is off and that's my fault for not 100% clarifying. 
 

If my narrative is perceived as false, then that's unfortunate b/c I was simply relaying information as I believe it was told to me.  No intent to deceive or create falsehoods.


Overall, we're good.  Pablo made a simple (and honest) mistake, will learn from it and will be better off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts

This issue has come up several times-perhaps there should be a new rule-either:

"A deal is not finalized until an :takeit:is posted in the thread, no matter what PM negotiations have occurred"

or:

"If an agreement is reached by PM, it trumps an :takeit:in the thread or any future PM negotiations"

One or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,994 posts
5 minutes ago, Columbia Comics said:

I've spoken to Pablo on the phone a couple of times and the only piece of info that was misunderstood on my end was the PM asking for the take it in the thread.  Apparently that was sent to Omaha and not GG.  So that piece of info is off and that's my fault for not 100% clarifying. 
 

If my narrative is perceived as false, then that's unfortunate b/c I was simply relaying information as I believe it was told to me.  No intent to deceive or create falsehoods.


Overall, we're good.  Pablo made a simple (and honest) mistake, will learn from it and will be better off. 

Appreciate the clarification.  It was an important component, at least in my mind to understand clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,235 posts
1 minute ago, kav said:

This issue has come up several times-perhaps there should be a new rule-either:

"A deal is not finalized until an :takeit:is posted in the thread, no matter what PM negotiations have occurred"

or:

"If an agreement is reached by PM, it trumps an :takeit:in the thread or any future PM negotiations"

One or the other.

I prefer the second. Time stamp rules. First acceptance of an offer by time stamp should prevail (unless otherwise noted in the thread).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts
1 minute ago, The-Collector said:

I prefer the second. Time stamp rules. First acceptance of an offer by time stamp should prevail (unless otherwise noted in the thread).

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,516 posts
Just now, MustEatBrains said:

Appreciate the clarification.  It was an important component, at least in my mind to understand clearly.

I absolutely agree.  It would have made it very clear what needed to happen.

Alas, I was incorrect and I'll own that.  To my knowledge, everything else is true.

 

As for personal lists, too many people around here jump the gun at the slightest imperfection.  But to each their own.  If I "updated my personal list" for every time someone did (or said) something I didn't like, I'd have 90% of the people here blocked..and probably them blocking me too!

And for stolen books, Pablo hasn't knowingly purchased any stolen merchandise.  The book in question was returned to the seller, who I believe had seller's remorse and made the "stolen" claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,516 posts
2 minutes ago, The-Collector said:

I prefer the second. Time stamp rules. First acceptance of an offer by time stamp should prevail (unless otherwise noted in the thread).

 

It shouldn't matter the rules as long as they're clearly spelled out.  Having universal rules that apply to everyone probably just doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts
5 minutes ago, Columbia Comics said:

 

It shouldn't matter the rules as long as they're clearly spelled out.  Having universal rules that apply to everyone probably just doesn't work.

The rules in the thread should clearly spell out which of the two options above is being employed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,235 posts
5 minutes ago, Columbia Comics said:

 

It shouldn't matter the rules as long as they're clearly spelled out.  Having universal rules that apply to everyone probably just doesn't work.

The rule do matter if one is easier to understand and apply.

See earlier post, the rules wouldn't be universal they would be opt out so that if parties want to stipulate their own terms that is fine. This would just be useful in the event that nothing is stipulated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,665 posts
14 minutes ago, kav said:

This issue has come up several times-perhaps there should be a new rule-either:

"A deal is not finalized until an :takeit:is posted in the thread, no matter what PM negotiations have occurred"

or:

"If an agreement is reached by PM, it trumps an :takeit:in the thread or any future PM negotiations"

One or the other.

I remember years ago, after an incident, the Boards tried to clarify exactly what Take It should mean. I don't think conclusion was reached. The problem lay with all the permutations of Take It.  I'll Take it per PM. I'll take it pending PM. I'll Take based on scan. I'll Take based on BC scan. Etc.Etc.Etc. It was my understanding from those discussions that the Seller can set the rules any way he deems appropriate = no Board specific Rules . The problem occurs when the Seller is not explicitly clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts
Just now, Bomber-Bob said:

I remember years ago, after an incident, the Boards tried to clarify exactly what Take It should mean. I don't think conclusion was reached. The problem lay with all the permutations of Take It.  I'll Take it per PM. I'll take it pending PM. I'll Take based on scan. I'll Take based on BC scan. Etc.Etc.Etc. It was my understanding from those discussions that the Seller can set the rules any way he deems appropriate = no Board specific Rules . The problem occurs when the Seller is not explicitly clear.

New rule: "If seller not explicitly clear, option #2 will be in effect"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,665 posts
3 minutes ago, kav said:

New rule: "If seller not explicitly clear, option #2 will be in effect"

I think another problem was brought up regarding timestamps. I think you can edit a PM without affecting the timestamp ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts

Maybe another solution would be if offer accepted and better offer comes in, seller can go back to first buyer and say hey i got a better offer can you beat it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26,716 posts
3 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I think another problem was brought up regarding timestamps. I think you can edit a PM without affecting the timestamp ?

As far as I can tell, the "timestamps" on the new boards change to "hours ago", etc. It's not the same as before.

I remember a lot of stuff, people editing take its in thread, people looking at photobucket to try to anticipate hot bargain books that were coming up, people fighting over what they thought was a bargain book...etc, etc. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26,716 posts
1 minute ago, kav said:

Maybe another solution would be if offer accepted and better offer comes in, seller can go back to first buyer and say hey i got a better offer can you beat it?

Kav, that might be one of the :whistle: most unusual things you have said and I've read a few doozies;) 

Maybe we can have people dress up in jousting outfits and...

Or people can just be respectful to each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,555 posts
Just now, skypinkblu said:

Kav, that might be one of the :whistle: most unusual things you have said and I've read a few doozies;) 

Maybe we can have people dress up in jousting outfits and...

Or people can just be respectful to each other?

lol I was just kidding.  But yeah i like the jousting idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
587 posts
22 minutes ago, skypinkblu said:

As far as I can tell, the "timestamps" on the new boards change to "hours ago", etc. It's not the same as before.

Why would they do that?  Can't you turn on the charm and get that fixed?  :foryou:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26,716 posts
10 minutes ago, Cliff R. said:

Why would they do that?  Can't you turn on the charm and get that fixed?  :foryou:

I don't think I've got enough charm to do anything;)  but the answer will probably be that the software engineers didn't plan on people  fighting over  discussing who got which book first;) ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
587 posts
4 minutes ago, skypinkblu said:

I don't think I've got enough charm to do anything;)  but the answer will probably be that the software engineers didn't plan on people  fighting over  discussing who got which book first;) ? 

Don't sell yourself short, Sharon! You are well respected here.  And software engineers may be notoriously bad at dealing with end users, but just appeal to their sense of order and precision and you might just persuade them.  Seriously.  They probably wear cesium wristwatches with femtosecond accuracy, and they're settling for 16th century sundial timekeeping for the boards? lol

Share this post


Link to post
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
6 6