A Night at the Opera...:)

Why not after a sale is made, the seller can give the buyer the option of leaving the price up, for future reference, or deleting it for privacy. Let the buyer decide which he prefers.

nice card..

Can't get anything by you guys - Honk Honk

Tony and Jason are in the minority on this. I wish i could get asking price on every card i sold. Would be great to point out to a future buyer the 'asking price' i supposively paid and so i need to ask for more because thats how much i have into it.

Its a big secret to know a price that is likely more than what i actually paid for a card? You guys are really going to complain and start a thread on this.. hmmm so im the annoying one that is interfering. I didnt start this thread and there are actual complainers about posting a price in a public forum and upset that their fantasy price is forever listed. Can always just not list a price if its so secret.

Heck many listings say 'if cant sell i will send to an auction house' I guess the auction house will delete the sale price when they sell it.

Lol, very good.

Greg and I don't always see eye to eye, but I'm in 100% agreement on this one. If you want to keep your asking price a secret sell it privately. Don't post it on a public forum.

On any quote, you are leaving what was said by the poster forever listed. If you quote a picture of the card, people wil see the Cert number forever though some people like to black out the cert number because they dont want it known. By quoting what someone says, their comments are there forever. So these quotes are preventing the seller themselves of what they want to leave in their post or not. Sometimes you see sellers delete entire threads which they cant do if there is someone quoting what they said.

Who is to decide where to draw the line of what you can quote or not. Your comment basically means we cant quote anything. If leon deletes the quote function then everything is solved, but why would he do that on a public forum.

I'm not trying to be petty, but you really need to define "interference." I'll give you two examples.

A) Seller lists a card on the BST. Someone posts "nice card." What harm have they done?
B) Seller lists a card on the BST. Someone posts "PM sent" but only wants to beat up on the seller's asking price, doesn't make a commitment to purchase and has only wasted the seller's time. Now, anybody else looking at that BST listing is going to see "PM sent" and think the item is not longer for sale.

Which is more interference, A or B? I guarantee B happens a lot more than A.

Pretty sure this answers your last paragraph. The rules decide, Leon enforces.

There should be no interference by 3rd parties within the Buy/Sell/Trade areas. Third parties are those not involved in a transaction. This includes, but is not limited to, posting current or historical cost information, commenting negatively on the offer or item, or anything that interferes with the listing in a negative way

Uh, try again.

My comment means that you or any other individual who is not involved in the transaction related to a BST post needs to not interject.

It looks from those rules that comments are fine as long as they are not negative. Not sure how saying nice card is negative or quoting anything the seller says. Its not quoting a negative comment from someone else, its a quote of the actual seller. You are also bumping the thread which is a positive thing.

Uh, read the rules. Third parties are clearly allowed to comment on posts. (Hence the rule of not saying anything negative) Plus how would you know if I made an offer or not. I have bought many cards on this site. Id rather have someone post nice card on my listing then pm me a low ball offer.

Heck people have posted VCP pricing (but fail to mention past sales that support my pricing ) on my listings and I never seen you comment about that but someone saying nice card and quoting what the seller actually says you have a problem with.

There should be no interference by 3rd parties within the Buy/Sell/Trade areas. Third parties are those not involved in a transaction. This includes, but is not limited to, posting current or historical cost information, commenting negatively on the offer or item, or anything that interferes with the listing in a negative way.

First two sentences are pretty clear.

This is really simple.
A) gives the seller a free bump to the top of the listings for absolutely no reason and is not fair to those that fallow the rules.

B) How by any stretch of the imagination does PM sent mean the item is now sold?

As far as prices being removed I am with Jake, I hate it also.

My last post on this.

All this is very petty, I know. I do believe the seller and/or buyer should have the right to decided if the price is removed, even after listing it publicly. Third parties should leave the thread alone. It may not be a negative to you but you can not know how other people view your comments/quotes.

So, if I'm looking at a BST listing and someone has posted "PM sent" to the seller, what am I supposed to assume? That the one who posted the "PM sent" is PMing the seller to invite him out for a beer? Come on, use a little bit of common sense.

And so is the third sentence. The first sentence establishes the rule. The second sentence defines third party and the last sentence defines interference.

As much as I never thought I would say this, Jake is right here...based on the wording.

Yes I agree they are very clear and I clearly followed them. If you dont agree, then the sentences arent pretty clear as you think.

That all said the system shouldn't be manipulated to show prices if another member doesn't want them...if they don't want prices shown then you need to heed their wishes. That kind of goes within the rules of posting historical pricing or something that can negatively influence a sale. Rule technicalities don't work here. It is sort of like a Judge Judy court. Regardless of some laws, If it makes sense then she agrees and if not she doesn't. Technicalities almost never work in her courtroom. I love her.

Understood, but no one has stated they didnt want them showed on any of their postings in the past. Heck didnt even know it was an issue. Been going on for years. The first I learned of it is the one or 2 people on the thread who didnt even start the thread. They also pretty much said they just disagreed because it was me they have issue with not the subject matter.. Ill follow whatever you want its your forum. I think part of the reason nobody ever contacted me is they thought it was allowed until right now.

To date, nobody has ever emailed me to take a post off. You did say if another member doesnt want them. I can only assume they are fine with it if they not say otherwise. 'if they dont want prices shown you need to heed their wishes' Understood but noone has ever told me that. (perhaps because they thought it was allowed until now) There was nothing for me to heed....

However i really dont think i was going on a technicality. Quoting what they say? Thats not posting historical pricing which would be from another source or where it came from. The seller already offered posted pricing to the public. Again its your forum ill follow whatever you want, but in the beggining i just hit quote and not reply and wasnt trying to sneak anything. Thats why i defended myself here with a lot of support.

So in the future if a member (buyer or seller) posts for me to remove a quoted asking price, that is fine as i will now know the member wanted it removed . Also the people that i know that never want it quoted ill heed that as well which appears to be 2 or 3 people thus far. Anyone else can pm me etc if they want to keep their posted asking price a secret. Again i think this impacts about 1% of the b/s/t listings.

Try some common sense yourself. I know you are on here to argue so common sense tells me I am the dumb one in this instance for even considering that you would use it.

I would assume the person inquired about the card and made an offer less than the asking price. Nothing more.

Typical douchebag self, huh Ben?

How do you determine the amount of the offer by only "PM sent"? Seriously, please explain.

Because I would also assume someone willing to pay the asking price would post I'll take it, not pm sent.

It seems logical that an offer of asking price would be "I'll take it." PM sent might mean registering interest, asking for more detail, or making an offer under asking. All of those are reasonable assumptions, especially the one about an offer under asking. Am I to assume a PM'd offer at or over asking?

Then to clear matters up, a seller on the ball usually comments, "PMs replied to" to make clear the item is still for sale.

So which one took it?

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=244654

Some sellers are lazy but if i see a pm sent, and a few days pass i assume it wasnt for asking price otherwise 'sold' would be on there. I also assume maybe they sent a pm but there was no answer so they posted it on the forum to tell the seller they tried to reach them. Maybe they wanted more photos who knows... But yeah, its just assumptions, maybe it did sell. I wouldn't actually know anything.

Dont know who took it but i do note the secret asking price is still there and also there is no post from me quoting it.

No way to tell from that post. Perhaps neither. My point is that to assume a sale was made because someone posted pm sent defies common sense. Any time I've listed a card for sale here I get a few questions, requests for better scans, and low ball offers before either a sale is made or the card gets sent off to pwcc.

This Help is known as a Modern Day Tool...
The Definition of "Tool" is Defined by each member who cares.
Either way, the word "Tool" Applies! :)

I get your point, you're not getting mine. I believe you're whole a lot smarter than Ben, so let's try this again. My original point was this. We were talking about BST interference and I said "Nice card" is no more interference than "PM sent." If one wants to inquire about a card, send a PM. Is there really a need to announce that you're sending the PM (I'm not talking about the cases where the poster has sent multiple PMs that weren't responded to)??? Why is "Nice card" interference but "PM sent" (when the purpose of the PM isn't to purchase the card) is not interference? I expect Ben not got get that, but surely you do????

Tool applies to your comment, but not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Fair enough. Anyone who feels either is interference should look up the definition of interference. Nice card, good luck with sale, etc. might not contribute much, but are pretty common on this site. The only thing quoting the original post interferes with is the ability to later delete the asking price.

If a well respected member of this forum makes a positive comment on an item I have for sale I am thrilled. It is somewhat akin to a respected endorsement. I will take those any time I can get them.

Also I have had enough instances, both as a buyer and a seller, where "PM sent" being posted didn't mean squat.

Finally, sometimes people will post a "PM sent" to get a time stamp in showing when the PM with "I'll take it" was made in case there are multiple people who might say the same thing. The "PM sent" post might make the difference in such a case.

Tom C

Dont forget to add it's coming from a third party, not interested in buying the card.

PM sent seems like emailing someone to tell them you left them a voice mail.

Anything other than "I'll take it"....aint takin' it

We're getting off track here, but wouldn't an "I'll take it" post accomplish the same thing with the time stamp as a "PM sent" post? Maybe it's just me? Maybe I think different than most? :confused:

ive always found the message stating a message was sent to be quite odd.

ummmmm...NO! Not the same at all!

exactly

It can serve a purpose if someone's notifications aren't working properly, or if they haven't responded to your pm.

How not? Explain.

saying pm sent...tells everyone that a pm was sent...usually to ask question or dicker over price. I'll take it...means i'll take it.

its as simple as that???

[QUOTE=pokerplyr80;1704314]It can serve a purpose if someone's notifications aren't working properly, or if they haven't responded to your pm.[




and how often do u really think this is the issue?

Did you even read what I was quoting/responding to?

My God, reading comprehension is a lost art on the boards.

honestly...no i didnt see it...i apologize in this case...and only this case I agree with you!

I should have stuck to my initial impression and just kept walkin'!

How do you know the third party isnt interested in buying the card. If they are interested then you are fine with that? If not why does being interested matter in your point of view. If 3 people are interested in a card and one person buys it..are the other 2 people 'third partys'? Only 1 person buys the card..but there could be 10 people interested.....

[QUOTE=ullmandds;1704319]Often enough that it doesn't hurt to post pm sent just in case. The seller could also have gotten more than 1 message and missed yours. Or their inbox could be full.