some more red meat for all the N54 moralists

[griffon512]

i made what i think was a good sale at the westchester show today. maybe karma had a part to play, maybe it didn't. in the chance it did, i'd like to repay or pay forward some portion of it in what i think is a worthy pursuit. mike, it sounds like you've had a shit time of it recently and it is undeserved given the positive interactions people have had with you.

in that context mike i'd like to send you $75 as a small fraction of the restitution you ultimately deserve of $3,700 plus the additional money you spent acquiring the cards to give back to zach. an honorable act deserves an honorable response...there's not enough instances of this happening and this time i can have some impact on the outcome. hopefully others will follow.

mike, please let me know what paypal address to send the money to and i will send it tonight. if you don't have paypal, please list your street address and i will send you a check. tim, if mike isn't like to read the remainder of this thread please pass along his contact info if you feel it appropriate.

regards, james

[rainier2004]

Originally Posted by griffon512

i made what i think was a good sale at the westchester show today. maybe karma had a part to play, maybe it didn't. in the chance it did, i'd like to repay or pay forward some portion of it in what i think is a worthy pursuit. mike, it sounds like you've had a shit time of it recently and it is undeserved given the positive interactions people have had with you.

in that context mike i'd like to send you $75 as a small fraction of the restitution you ultimately deserve of $3,700 plus the additional money you spent acquiring the cards to give back to zach. an honorable act deserves an honorable response...there's not enough instances of this happening and this time i can have some impact on the outcome. hopefully others will follow.

mike, please let me know what paypal address to send the money to and i will send it tonight. if you don't have paypal, please list your street address and i will send you a check. tim, if mike isn't like to read the remainder of this thread please pass along his contact info if you feel it appropriate.

regards, james

Awesome gesture...very nice bud. I'm not sure Mike would take it, but its an awesome gesture James.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not to fault James in any way but Chris should be making the first move here, then we can see where things end up. I would give him some time first.

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not to fault James in any way but Chris should be making the first move here, then we can see where things end up. I would give him some time first.

peter, i understand where you are coming from but i disagree on chris making the first move. chris had plenty of opportunity to make the first move. he didn't. i'm not critical of chris' decision. this is a legal clusterfuck due to the attorney cost vs. potential remediation dollar amount issue, along with how time consuming it would be to pursue a legal remedy. everyone down the chain in this transaction is worse off currently in some form -- whether it be business reputation or financially -- but it is likely that none of these people had malicious intent.

this is an ideal situation where a third party (or parties if others choose to chip in) can step in and pursue an ethical remedy where a legal remedy likely falls short.

if out of pressure from this thread chris revisits the idea of paying for some of mike's cost my actions do not preclude him from doing so, but i do not think that chris should feel that obligation on ethical grounds.

[timn1]

James, it really is kind of you to offer money, but I can't fathom why you would think that Chris should not feel any obligation to do anything about this ???

Originally Posted by griffon512

peter, i understand where you are coming from but i disagree on chris making the first move. chris had plenty of opportunity to make the first move. he didn't. i'm not critical of chris' decision. this is a legal clusterfuck due to the attorney cost vs. potential remediation dollar amount issue, along with how time consuming it would be to pursue a legal remedy. everyone down the chain in this transaction is worse off currently in some form -- whether it be business reputation or financially -- but it is likely that none of these people had malicious intent.

this is an ideal situation where a third party (or parties if others choose to chip in) can step in and pursue an ethical remedy where a legal remedy likely falls short.

if out of pressure from this thread chris revisits the idea of paying for some of mike's cost my actions do not preclude him from doing so, but i do not think that chris should feel that obligation on ethical grounds.

[griffon512]

Originally Posted by timn1

James, it really is kind of you to offer money, but I can't fathom why you would think that Chris should not feel any obligation to do anything about this ???

tim, i'm basing that statement on ethical (not legal) grounds on the following:

1. i'm making the assumption based on what was written in this thread that chris did not know the cards were stolen. obviously chris had no control over what zach's brother did.

2. if he did not know the cards were stolen, he did nothing wrong in the act of purchasing and selling the cards.

3. the cost of anyone down the chain -- none of whom have culpability in the theft -- pursuing legal action against those who do not refund their purchase price is greater in money/time than what they stand to gain from a positive legal outcome (best case scenario of breaking even i presume). this disincentivizes them from pursuing legal action. this is a good example, in my opinion, of the legal system not providing an attractive alternative. as mike stated above, after talking to counsel he made the decision that it would have been potentially cost and time prohibitive for him to legally pursue reimbursement from chris. chris would have been in the same situation if he did reimburse mike, and so forth. ultimately the thief is likely not in a position to make monetary restitution, which would have been the ideal remedy of the legal system.

4. given the above, a third party providing partial or full restitution -- i would like to start if mike is open to it -- seems like a good alternative.

i don't want to get into a long debate on the ethics of this, who is to blame, etc. i stated my opinion and i recognize that reasonable people will disagree on a fair ethical outcome.

i'd rather start the action of making it better for mike, and in turn, me. i would feel better if mike would accept my $75. maybe others will follow. improving mike's life after a tough spell is worth more to me overall than the cost of $75. it starts to reciprocate something honorable that he did.

[Kenny Cole]

At the amount involved, it would probably be a small claims case. Neither side would even need to hire an attorney, although either could and might want to. They would go pitch it to the judge (you generally don't get a jury unless you specifically ask for one which, at least here, generally irritates the assigned judge greatly) and the judge decides. Assuming no attorney involvement, you are out whatever the court costs are, which you recoup if you win. That is the current solution to smaller cases dollar-wise which would otherwise not be financially feasible.

[timn1]

As mentioned, Mike currently has his hands full with family stuff, plus he was never trying to make this a big public stink, so he may not post much more on it anytime soon. Though he can always correct me, I'm fairly sure he is not interested in suing anyone in any of the 50 states. He knows the amount involved would not be worth the hassles. However, I don't agree with Jeff's suggestion about how the issue is too trivial to be worth having this discussion. Principle is involved.

Here we have people who don't even know Mike offering to defray some of his loss, but the two others directly involved, Chris and Zach, who benefitted from the events and then let Mike do all the dirty work and absorb all the financial loss for eighteen months, should step up and be honorable men about this, and offer to do something.

For those offering money, which is extremely kind of them, I will let Mike tell you whether he wants to accept it. But as his closest friend, I am certain that the lost money has upset him less than the disappointment of seeing two people he also considered hobby friends, so completely fail to hold up their obligation to deal fairly with him when all he wanted was to make a bad situation better.

Tim

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not to fault James in any way but Chris should be making the first move here, then we can see where things end up. I would give him some time first.

[griffon512]

my concern is he won't take it from myself and potentially others. i hope it's not seen as an act of charity. it isn't. it's an attempt to remediate a problem when at least a partial solution is readily available, and ultimately would make me feel better for pursuing it.