Subject:
|
Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Sep 1999 21:15:33 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
LPIENIAZEK@NOVERA.spamlessCOM
|
Viewed:
|
1215 times
|
| |
|
|
David Eaton wrote:
> It kinda sounds, however, like you're arguing against your own actions... let's
> say the McDonalds set was the cure... wasn't the point of your action to
> prevent some poor idiot from buying the set at 10x the regular cost?
No, it was to increase the level of information in the market place. I
WANT sellers to dig out rare sets, and I want buyers to buy them. If
they are blowing their money on stuff they can get at retail, they're
not spending their money on rare sets and thus not incenting sellers to
dig up those rare sets so I can buy them too.
> It kinda
> sounds like you thought the seller was in the wrong for not providing the set
> number, and you were trying to prevent victims from this wrong.
Hmm... I'm not sure a buyer who acts on insufficient information is a
victim per se, just an example of evolution in action.
My issue was more aesthetic than moral. :-)
> You can say
> that since you were providing only neutral info you were behaving neutrally,
> but I still think the point of your action was to undermine the sale at such a
> ridiculous price. Hence it sounds like you were interfering the seller's rights
> of business conduct.
Hmm.. another interesting point. I'm not sure that sellers have a right
to control all the information available to buyers. Would we say that
Ford was justified if they had managed to somehow prevent (especially if
they did so by force or fraud...) Consumers Reports from reporting how
flammable Pinto tanks were? I dare say not, most of us would agree that
the market as a whole is well served by increased information.
> Hmm... maybe that sounds unclear. My point is there that
> you may have committed a neutral act, but your intent was otherwise. But I
> digress... after all, you never claimed that your actions were
> moral/immoral/neutral to begin with.
Oh sorry, I forgot to so claim, but I will now. I claim that increasing
the flow of information in a lawful manner is in fact a moral thing to
do, even an altruistic one, if you will, although I say not altruistic
for me by my defintion, because it has a clear benefit to me of making a
better market.
eBay doesn't see it that way. They prefer to enable the seller to
control information. They have written their TOS that way. Their
perogative. But just one more fact to evaluate when we decide which
company to give our custom to when seeking auction sites.
> I agree with your actions, though... I'd've been tempted to still post the set
> number and availibility, because I think the buyers have the right to be
> treated equally. That's not to say that some guy SHOULDN'T pay some ridiculous
> price for it, and that the seller SHOULDN'T sell it to them for that-- indeed,
> the buyer can be mistreated at his own fault, and it's not right or wrong. But
> purposely hiding the set number certainly made it easier for people to be
> mistreated. Hence, that's not really being morally evil, it's just not being
> very charitable. But I have a tendancy to want to be charitable... I think most
> people do.
You have to decide what to do for yourself, I cannot do that for you, or
it would be no good, but you already know that, I just like repeating
myself...
For me, now, it is clear cut. An eBay rep has said I can't. Until and
unless I can get that ruling overturned, I have to abide or I am not
true to my principles of abiding by contracts I freely enter into. Make
no mistake, I freely entered into my agreement with eBay, I use their
site as a buyer, therefore I MUST abide by their TOS or I am defrauding
them.
--
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.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
