Subject:
|
Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.terms
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Apr 2000 00:52:23 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
5926 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ...
> You're right -- (IMHO) -- they're not much different in that point of view.
> The reason they weren't written as being strictly prohibited in the Terms • of
> Use Agreement is that the area of gray is so much larger in non-auction
> commerce than it is in auction commerce -- or at least that was the • original
> thinking. Blatant flogs of any type are bad, and nobody (I hope! :) wants • to
> encourage them.
>
> I don't disagree at all that blatant flogs should be made verboten across
> the board, and I'd love to see the Terms simplified so that "auction" (if
> possible) didn't even occur in the document, except as part of an exemplary
> list of stuff.
>
> The "devil is in the details" here -- in rewording things. (That's one of
> the reasons for the existence of this .admin.terms newsgroup, as well -- to
> have a discussion area focused on fixing up the wording.) FrankF made some
> good headway into this a while back...
Perhaps something on the lines of:
-----------
Posts offering items for sale, trade, auction, or "wanted" posts, or
anything else related to "market" type activities are generally not welcome
outside the lugnet.market hierarchy. Additionally it is expected that these
types of posts will be posted in the appropriate group within the
lugnet.market hierarchy. Certain exceptions are allowed (and this may not be
an exhaustive list, and is not an invitation to announce your auction to the
world just by making it look like one of these posts):
- Pointers to auction web pages, or other market type pages which are
showing something of significant historical interest (including pointers to
places where brand new sets may be seen, though please be careful here that
the reference is not a "leak" of TLC intellectual property).
- Incidental market requests, where the main purpose of the post is
something else (probably a discussion of some part or set), but you happen
to have a one liner at the bottom indicating you want one of these items, or
you have some to offer.
- Mention of a personal sale/trade/auction page in one's signature. Such a
reference should just be a simple URL with perhaps a "see my trade page at
...." type of introduction.
- Market posts of an extreme local or organizational nature are ok in the
appropriate group so long as the group has not requested that it's charter
disallow such posts. Of especial interest to local folks are announcements
of stores which have this or that set, sales, etc, but an individual who
wants to sell something and doesn't want to have to ship it would also
generally be welcome.
Due to the sensitivity of some people to auctions, one should be much more
careful with auction references. To this extent "look at this silly eBay
auction" posts belong in lugnet.market.auction [Ed. note: unless we make a
special group for these]. A pointer to an auction which is demonstrating
some new technique for selling {Ed. note: like when Larry posted a pointer
to how he was selling his hopper cars], could reasonably show up in
lugnet.market.theory. Note that there may be situations where it is
appropriate to post an auction in a local or organizational group
(especially if an organization holds a fund raising auction).
Since there are well defined areas to post market type posts, a simple
guideline to follow is that if you're not sure if your market related post
belongs outside the appropriate market group, don't post it.
------------
One side issue I see raised out of the above is that to some extent the
charters of local groups should be adjustable by people in that region.
Organization group charters of course should be almost totally up to the
group, subject to approval by Todd.
If the above is the direction Todd wants to go, I do suggest being a little
more accepting of possibly misplaced posts so long as they are in a market
group. I'm specifically thinking of Scott Arthur's pre-auction trade offer
here (however, I also support a pointer from the rules to a nice guide to
crafting market posts which would guide people to avoid the poor wording of
that post).
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: auction vs non-auction double standard?
|
| (...) I suppose it depends on what standard one sees as being doubled. Normally the term applies to cases where there shouldn't be a double standard, like sexes or races. In this case, if the standard is "selling" or "flogging," then, yes, it's a (...) (25 years ago, 12-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
20 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
