View Single Post
  #1  
Old 12-23-2024, 12:40 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 34,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911 View Post
And you think it is wrong for an individual, but perfectly alright for a corporation, and you cannot understand why some people would not draw different lines for different people/groups but have ethic based on the act, not the thing committing said act?

And you think it is perfectly honest to run fake auctions for items one doesn't have, but only if that is a corporation doing it (otherwise, if it was honest independent of the thing doing it, then there is no reason an individual wouldn't or shouldn't do the same thing)?

Even if one supports it, running auctions for things one does not have and cannot possibly deliver on is "dishonest". I think we all, at some level, must be cognizant of that.
To me it would be dishonest if it was part of a scheme to defraud, by getting someone to pay for the item and then not delivering the card. That would apply equally to an individual and a company. The facts here are unique -- there was no such intent nor do you claim there was. The reasons for continuing the auction had nothing at all to do with fraud. IMO you could question whether they made the right judgment call under all the circumstances, but I don't buy into the characterizations of fake, dishonest, etc.
__________________
Four phrases I have coined that sum up today's hobby:
No consequences.
Stuff trumps all.
The flip is the commoodity.
Animal Farm grading.
Reply With Quote