 | | Re: Planning, not arguments, please (was Re: [DISC] Shortcircuit eBay?
|
| Mitchell I. Puschett wrote in message <37268F52.E2AFDA8D@pol.net>... (...) Thanks for getting back onto the topic I was interested in... (...) This is interesting to me. However, I think these rules are out dated. Since eBay recently changed the (...) (26 years ago, 28-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | | | Re: Planning, not arguments, please (was Re: [DISC] Shortcircuit eBay?
|
| (...) The valid counter-argument is that if the sniper followed the rules of this particular auction, the problem would not have occurred. As in a sport, rules are present to encourage a fair match. Occasionally, a trivial violation leads to a (...) (26 years ago, 28-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | | | Re: Planning, not arguments, please (was Re: [DISC] Shortcircuit eBay?
|
| (...) He should have read the rules of the auction. Several messages have stated that the auction announcement should and must include a description of how the auction is going to differ from a regular eBay auction. Bidders should always read (...) (26 years ago, 28-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | | | Re: Planning, not arguments, please (was Re: [DISC] Shortcircuit eBay?
|
| Steve Bliss wrote in message <37271966.8425450@lu...et.com>... (...) The rules, if clearly stated, should not be arguable, although they still will upset some snipers. Funny - yes, thats true, but the actual motive is to give the rightful (or (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| | | | | Re: Planning, not arguments, please (was Re: [DISC] Shortcircuit eBay?
|
| (...) Good questions. Bidders who don't look at all postings would be the biggest problem. eBay won't do a darn thing--we'd be working entirely within the rules. We *would* be risking getting negative feedback. requoting: (...) Which points out (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.market.auction)
| |
