Subject:
|
Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.auction
|
Date:
|
Fri, 23 Apr 1999 03:17:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1154 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.auction, jdiri14897@email.msn.com (John DiRienzo) writes:
> > > > It is far better to design the system to allow such behavior via
> > > > legitimate means than to allow it only via trickery, especially
> > > > when it is a commonly requested and useful feature.
> > >
> > > I concur - if this is an often requested feature, maybe it should be
> > > implemented. Still, as a seller, I don't like bidders being able to
> > > scare other bidders away from my auction.
> >
> > But you have no choice. The issue is a moot one: A bidder can always
> > attempt to scare away other bidders in your auction, choosing from a
> > myriad of techniques, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that
> > you or I or anyone else as a seller can ever do about it.
>
> No kidding! But why would I support a feature that simplifies this kind
> of tactic, if I dislike these tactics?
If you dislike the feature that much, then you shouldn't support the
feature. But it is a very good feature nonetheless, because it helps
your bidders accomplish what they want to accomplish.
> And, obviously, I can not eliminate
> the wise bidding habits that a few people possess, but I can choose the
> forum which makes those habits the least harmful to me.
You won't make anything less harmful for yourself by making large bid jumps
more difficult for your bidders.
> No, I did not misunderstand. What you had written was something about
> allowing firm bids because if you don't allow them, then bidders would
> resort to devious bidding (using an alias) (see line marked "BS" above).
That's 50% of it. I believe what I said was, "It is far better to design
the system to allow such behavior [submitting firm bids or making large
bid jumps] via legitimate means than to allow it only via trickery,
especially when it is a commonly requested and useful feature."
> For that exact statement, there is no way in hell I could ever agree with
> it. Its much like saying, "People do drugs and they must break the law
> (rules) to use them, so, instead, lets legalize them and let doctors
> prescribe them!"
drugs : bid manipulation :: apples : oranges
Working around a flawed system which tries to prevent large bid jumps by
asking a friend to help is neither illegal nor against the rules of the
auction (unless you declare that it is against the rules, but what's the
point in that when you could never detect such activity or police such a
rule?).
> I disagreed with the particular defense you had used for allowing firm
> bids in a proxy system.
It wasn't a defense for allowing them. It was a proof that any auction
system allows them whether you like it or not. So you might as well make it
easy rather than difficult because it's what people want. If you think that
making large jumps difficult for people lowers the amount of money you'll
take in, well, you can go right on believing that.
> I only lightly touched upon this asinine logic when
> I stated that I disagreed with your "basis".
You have a moral and ethical objection to supporting a feature which you
find unattractive. Fine.
> For the record, I do not see
> large bid jumps as dishonest, only disheartening for this auction
> buyer/seller, who will likely use an auction that does not have that
> feature (that avoids trickery!) enabled (but not necessarily).
I daresay you're only fooling yourself. All auctions have this feature.
Some just make it easier than others. The end results are the same.
> I am sure you have
> other reasons (others have already posted some good ones) to allow firm
> bids in a proxy environment, but the defense you chose to use definitely
> deserved the argument that it received, and probably more, which it just
> received.
It was not a defense. Its purpose was to illustrate logically that trying
to prevent them is futile. That and nothing more. The argument that they
are a good feature is a completely separate logical argument:
Firm bids should be allowed in a proxy environment because firm bids are a
time-saving feature. If you disallow them, you cause people to waste their
time either by nursing their bid upward to where they want it to be, or by
finding ways around the broken rules.
Rules designed to prevent something that's neither detectable nor
preventable are no rules at all. Unless you plan to punish those who break
the rules, should you ever happen to find out that someone has broken a
rule.
> In other posts, I have seen some valid arguments that answered my question
> (what is the use/need for firm bids in proxy auctions). For further
> clarity, I also stated that as a seller I don't like firm bids, and that
> we can drop this because some auctions will allow firm bids, and some
> won't, in the line below.
I respect your choice not to make it easy for people to make firm/hard bids
in auctions. Especially after having at least heard the other side of the
coin.
One final thing I want to add, though, is that, in my experience, you really
don't have to be afraid of making less money as a seller if you let people
make firm bids. The AucZILLA rules have the following statement:
...
If you want to place a "hard bid" at a specific price, you can use two
dollar-signs $$ in the [ ] and your bid will be recorded directly at
that price (assuming of course that you submit a strong enough bid).
This type of bid would be useful if you want to scare someone away with
a large one-step increase.
...
which people appreciate seeing spelled out like that.
People like options. People like to be able to think with their own mind,
not be constrained by the computer. Minimum increments are good, maximum
increments are no good.
> > How do those two classes of people relate (those deriving pleasure
> > from it and those being frustrated by it)? Is it a 50-50 mixture?
> > 60-40? 20-80?
>
> I don't know an exact percentage. Looking at the number of sales made,
> and the price of the stock, I am guessing that there are more than a few
> happy customers. I do believe the animosity that *seems* so prevalent is
> only a small percentage of the actual users. I believe the happy users
> far out weigh the disgruntled users.
Ignorance is bliss.
> > Would your mother or your grandmother derive pleasure or frustration
> > from it? How about a grade school kid? How about high school kid
> > on summer break?
>
> God rest her soul... I firmly believe my grand mother would be in love
> with eBay had she stuck around a little longer.
Don't you think she would love Derick's system a million times better?
> Perhaps you are not asking
> the right person, and I am confident you are aiming at the wrong niche
> - it is amazing how many middle age or older ladies love eBay. But so
> do young and old men.
It's also amazing how many people eat Spam sandwiches, drink Budweiser, and
think that Married with Children is good television.
Yes, you are right-on with the "wrong niche" statement. :-)
But I'm not arguing that eBay isn't adequate for the masses. The problem is
that it's just barely adequate -- not excellent, and certainly not a good
role model. Kudos to Derick for starting a new, general purpose auction
environment which WILL appeal to the masses yet won't have many of the
horrible broken things that are wrong with eBay.
> Using eBay quite a bit, I have dealt with a lot of happy people.
Happy snipers? People with infinite amounts of money? Or normal humans?
> I have heard some "horror stories", in fact they aren't uncommon,
> but people still manage to enjoy it.
...in the same way that people still manage to enjoy exercise and homework?
;-)
[just kidding]
> Of course, perfection has not been
> achieved, and I personally hope that the smaller auctions can find their
> niche on the net and that some auction can grow to compete with eBay on
> its scale.
Amen to that.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Proxy ratcheting: How do auction systems work?
|
| Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) unable (...) as (...) to (...) I don't know if eBay spends ANY time policing their system. I am sure they do, but its not evident. The feedback thing seems to be the main thing thats used. And if you fail to (...) (26 years ago, 22-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
96 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
