 | | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Yeah, in a way it is. The sad thing is, I almost bought it a while back just because I liked the thought of having a little window open with all the auctions I was watching that is updated on a regular basis. The sniping function wouldn't be (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Frog
|
|
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <36cb6267.40441156@l...et.com>... (...) 6x9 ?.... Selçuk (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) I'm snipping everything else because for this post at least I want to focus on this thought that using an outside service is even possibly detrimental to the community. Sorry to be blunt, but do you know what the hell you're talking about when (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) --Todd (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) (Guess you read this before I posted later that I may have slightly misinterpreted what you were saying.) (...) Well, I'm not PO'ed about it, but I'd say I didn't "accuse" you of "saying" anything. I misunderstood PART of what you actually (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: shills on eBay
|
|
(...) If he was the high bidder what difference does it make? It was his set, and he was the high bidder. He still had to pay the eBay fee, I bet, so if he did sell it to his offline friend things worked the same as if he had sold it to the second (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) If it is it isn't obvious. I forget the name of it now, but I will look for it and post it. It has a function that allows you to snipe, I do remember that. Oh, here it is. (URL) Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) No problem. I flared up too. (...) Understood. I would just prefer that the buyer who gets it is someone who participates online. From what others have said, about half the winning bids go to people who don't participate in RTL or Lugnet, and (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Although in this case, completism was 100% of the motivation, it's not always about completism. For example, Suz and I were bidding on an extremely rare old '75 Wild West set, (URL) an auction Matt Chiles held about a year ago. The set was (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "the community"
|
|
[Crossposted from lugnet.off-topic.debate with followups set to lugnet.admin.general] (...) I think the French newsgroup fr.rec.jeux.lego is going to pass. When it was being discussed in fr.usenet.forums.evolution last month, the CFD received quite (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Frog
|
|
(...) See? I'm slowly influencing you. You're ranking cats right up there with dolphins and monkeys. :) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) That just demonstrates the level of insanity some completists can achieve. :) To some a set is worth the some of its parts. To others the set as an entity has value that far outweighs the sum of its parts. I fall into one of those groups. :) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | "the community"
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, galliard@shades-of-night.com (James Brown) writes: [...] (...) [...] Ultimately, that's what LUGNET is designed to evolve into -- so that you wouldn't have to say RTL/LUGNET or LUGNET/RTL or "all AFOLs online," etc. But (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: shills on eBay
|
|
(...) OK cool, that's what I thought you probably meant. It certainly was clear for anyone who's been around for a while. I just wanted to point out in no uncertain terms for the record (since there are always new people coming online and getting up (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) I may have misunderstood what you said before and responded in a rather offended tone in a previous post. Forgive me if it offended you. But I don't agree with this either. If a set will sell for $100 on RTL but might go for $150 on eBay (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: shills on eBay
|
|
(...) benefit (...) The point I was illustrating (not clear enough, sorry) was not to assume the guy was lying about his off-line friend. James (URL) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | reserve prices on eBay
|
|
<snip> (...) That is precisely the kind of situation for which a reserve price is meant. I'm usually not a fan of reserve prices either, but they are indeed a good alternative to high minimum starting bids, as you pointed out. <snipped him pointing (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Whoa! Back up a second there! I neither said nor implied any such thing! What I _did_ say was that I treat e-bay like I treat a garage sale. A place to get Lego. What I _did_ say was that selling through e-bay takes Lego out of the community. (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: shills on eBay
|
|
(...) How is that a case in point? You didn't sell anything in AucZILLA VIII -- I did. (And I've never shilled, and never will.) --Todd (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CFD: e-bay (aka ranting and raving)
|
|
(...) Thanks again :) Yet if using an outside auction service is detrimental, then it doesn't matter how how much good I do--I'm still responsible for detrimental actions. Which is why the question of detriment is important. (...) Ahhh...I think (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
