Subject:
|
Re: McDonalds set
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Sep 1999 04:23:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
981 times
|
| |
|
|
I would definitely argue that pointing out a retail outlet that is selling
something that is being auctioned is definitely NOT siphoning. You gain
nothing by pointing out that S@H (or Kmart, TRU, etc) has something
available.
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> I got an offline question about TOS (which means Terms of Service) and
> where it is.
>
> http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/png-user.html
>
> See section 5 for the rule against offering bidders items. At least
> that's how I read:
>
> "You may not email bidders in a currently open auction being run by a
> different seller, offering similar or the same items at any price level
> (bid siphoning)"
>
> It could be argued that informing a bidder of a third party is not quite
> bid siphoning...
>
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
> lugnet.
>
> NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
> will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: McDonalds set
|
| I got an offline question about TOS (which means Terms of Service) and where it is. (URL) section 5 for the rule against offering bidders items. At least that's how I read: "You may not email bidders in a currently open auction being run by a (...) (25 years ago, 9-Sep-99, to lugnet.general)
|
81 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
