eBay vrs42?

From: Vintage Computer Festival <vcf_at_siconic.com>
Date: Sat Feb 12 11:06:30 2005

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Jim Battle wrote:

> Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Feb 2005, vrs wrote:
> ...
> >>I think it is important to treat sellers of classic equipment well -- we
> >>want there to be more of them, not less.
> >
> > So we should now all feel pity for the sellers and require everyone to bid
> > on every item no matter whether we like it or not, just so the seller can
> > get the highest price possible? Taken to the logical ends, this is
> > basically what you're arguing.
> Why stop there? If you are going to put words in his mouth, why not
> claim that vrs was really implying that we all need to provide sexual
> favors for the sellers? Treating someone well or with respect in no way
> means that we have to do more than that.

The context was that we should not allow buyers to collude because the
poor sellers will not get more money. That's a specious argument. This
goes back to the seller not being entitled to any guaranteed price. Your
Monty Python extension of the logical ends notwithstanding.

> >>I'd be essentially unable to pursue the hobby without them -- there just
> >>aren't enough collectors and equipment known to me personally. Without
> >>connections, I'd still have just the one bare-bones 8/i that I started
> >>with. (I still might not have been willing to toss it, but I bet others
> >>who could never hope to fix it would have.)
> >
> > That's no reason to force everyone to bid one every item so that the
> > seller's can become wealthy. They aren't entitled to anything.
> You are putting up a strawman argument to make it easy to knock down.
> Vince nor I claimed anybody was forced to bid on every item. This is
> the third of fourth time you or eric has made this exact statement when
> nobody has made that claim.

Perhaps. Your position is that buyers should not be allowed to share
information about their bid. Or that they should not be allowed to decide
that one will bid and one will not (collusion). Correct?

If you're interested in an item and you are not allowed to inform yourself
as to what other bidders might do--which is a totally arbitrary
restriction--then your option is to bid or not bid. If you decide to not
bid because you are not allowed to ask other bidders what they intend to
do, or you are not allowed to collude with other bidders, is this also
unfair to the seller or unethical?

Sellam Ismail                                        Vintage Computer Festival
International Man of Intrigue and Danger                http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers   ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com  || at http://marketplace.vintage.org  ]
Received on Sat Feb 12 2005 - 11:06:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:37 BST