None of the Collectibles section people or people of that auction red-rated me. I have explained myself. What does this tell you. Also, again, it's interesting that you're completely fine with vod blackmailing/threatening me. Hoping that theymos removes the DT list completely. It's a bad bad thing. |
|
|
|
Why was it a mistake? Because it was an untrustworthy action. I'm curious, why do you think it was a mistake if you don't think you did anything wrong?
As you're curious, I'll of course explain myself. It was a mistake, because it was against Bitcointalk auction standards that had been defined in practice during the years. I wasn't aware of that self-bidding was not cool, I learned about it later. Self-bidding however is not wrong, untrustworthy or scammy in any way. It's simply not part of the auction standard of Bitcointalk, even though self-bidding is part of various auction standards around the world. Again, your opinion about it doesn't change that fact one bit. So of course I wouldn't want to go against Bitcointalk auction norms again, so it can be called a mistake done by me. I feel I have an obligation to explain my feedback to you.
No, you don't have any obligation. Had you left it years ago with the bolded and left out the rest, you probably would have been fine, people would have forgiven you and none of this would be an issue.
Or in other words the fate of my trust was simply about sentence "but in no way untrustworthy action or scamming". Funny. I really can't do much here, right? You think that half of the world are scammers, ie. anyone holding an auction where the seller also can bid. So be it, I guess. No stating the facts of the auctions around the world, or red trust follows. Only USA is. Right? Ask Theymos to remove me from DT if you feel I'm abusing my position, and I'll be completely fine with that. I wouldn't remove my feedback though, because it is completely accurate.
If you feel that you should be removed from DT, why not ask him yourself? |
|
|
|
the case came to a conclusion
You think that a 3 year old auction event didn't come to a conclusion? Self-bidding on that auction three years ago was a mistake, but in no way untrustworthy action or scamming. Your opinion doesn't change that fact one bit. Again, your incompetence regarding auctions shows here, and apparent unwillingness to educate yourself. Also "interesting" that you don't find blackmailing/threatening untrustworthy at all. You know, the thing Vod did to me. I hope theymos deletes DT. |
|
|
|
Please red-rate theymos as well, as he agrees with me that self-bidding is not scammy. Also red-rate Vod who said he doesn't see my actions there as untrustworthy. Also red-rate everyone else agreeing with me. Nice example of DT position misuse, SaltySpitoon.
I see your actions as you not honoring an auction, and thats untrustworthy. My feedback is just a warning for anyone who might be interested in participating in an auction that you run, that I'd recommend against it. When Theymos doesn't honor an auction, I'll leave him negative feedback as well. I honored my auction perfectly. Stop lying. Auction rules were followed 100% and nothing shady, unethical, wrong, scammy, untrustworthy or bad was done. It's just your incompetence regarding auctions that led to your rating. Please red-tag others too, show your skills to everyone! See this (there the auction rules were changed during auction): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3147489.0 More ridiculous ratings would likely lead to changes, I don't want anything bad to mprep. Also tag BTCC official for changing auction rules during auction. No offence, Bobby... I just want to make a point. I hope that theymos removes DT list. |
|
|
|
If you don't see wrong as wrong in the same way that 99.9% of other people do, so be it. Please red-rate theymos as well, as he agrees with me that self-bidding is not scammy. Also red-rate Vod who said he doesn't see my actions there as untrustworthy. Also red-rate everyone else agreeing with me. Nice example of DT position misuse, SaltySpitoon. |
|
|
|
I've made my position clear and you've made yours. I added some feedback of my own just so you don't need to worry about Vod anymore.
I truly hope theymos deletes the whole DT list.... You obviously think that you know auctions better than the president of Brandly & Associates, Inc. |
|
|
|
It's common in Europe, as TMAN has said earlier too, that disclosing such intention to bid doesn't necessarily need to be disclosed.
TMAN has a documented past of manipulating auctions for his own goods. I'm not sure you should be using him as a source. I am saying that in Europe it is common. In other news, I see SaltySpitoon went and left me a fresh red rating. |
|
|
|
They are not on topic, you are ranting around about perfectly valid -ve you received from Vod while this topic is all about trust spam.
Perfectly valid? Is it perfectly valid to blackmail/threaten and then leave a negative rating when blackmailing fails? Ok. Maybe slightly off-topic, yes. My point was to describe how all these problems (this kind of spam you linked) as well as other obviously wrong rating activity could be possibly dismissed. (That would be promoting use of trust system that makes "untrusted feedback" completely irrelevant.) |
|
|
|
A wordpress link doesn't mitigate the pages of legal documents that say you cant.
That guy seems to be an expert of auctions... The author of that site, quoted from his site: Mike Brandly began his auction career in 1979. He is president of Brandly & Associates, Inc. and is an Auctioneer for RES Auction Services, a large real estate auction brokerage based in Ohio. Mr. Brandly’s appraisal company completes over 150 appraisals per year for Probate, Civil and Bankruptcy cases. He holds a weekly auction at his facility in Groveport, Ohio, a twice-monthly car auction for Goodwill Columbus (Ohio,) various on-site auctions and other special-event auctions throughout the United States. He seems to know his business. What "pages of legal documents" are you talking about? Any source/links? So you are saying auctions are entirely pointless?
No. I am saying that not all auctions are forced sale auctions. Even if its legally acceptable, you don't think you are worthy of negative feedback for deceptive practices?
I don't think it was deceptive. It certainly wasn't meant as deceptive. Again, it is common practice in my country (Finland). Secondly, that if the seller wants to reserve the right to bid, that such must be disclosed You didn't disclose your intention to bid, so even your cherry picked source doesn't actually support your position. You ignored the "almost all state law says" part. Almost all. Not all. Also it's just USA. Different auction standards exist. It's common in Europe, as TMAN has said earlier too, that disclosing such intention to bid doesn't necessarily need to be disclosed. It's not cherry-picked. You can go search articles about auctioneer bidding, you won't find many.. You'll see the one I found was the first one in google results. |
|
|
|
The text I linked below argues that yes, you can bid on your own item even in the USA auctions.
Try to bid on your own eBay auction and let me know how that works out for you. Ebay standards != all auction standards. Ebay doesn't enable sellers to bid on their items. Some auction standards do. First rule when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging. Please consider this line of thought.
What hole am I in? People only seem to talk about this auction, even though it has nothing to do with Vod's abuse. He blackmailed/threatened me (basically "I will red-rate you if you don't remove your rating") and then red-rated when I didn't do as he wanted. That is the reason for his red rating towards me. Not any auction. Btw, again, this Vod abuse case is NOT RELATED to any auction; read what happened. |
|
|
|
Again, you can't bid on your own item. A bid is a legally binding contract, and you can't enter a contract with yourself. If user A bids $10 on something, that bid means that they have entered a contract to pay $10 for the item, on the condition that a new contract (bid) doesn't outbid them. If the owner then bids $15, that bid isn't valid because the owner cannot enter a contract to pay oneself, so the current bid would still be $10 from user A.
If you are arguing that Shill bidding implies requires that you would have needed to placed a bid from an account named Anduck1, lets for the sake of argument that you are right and its not illegal. It is however still a void bid, and your offense is not honoring an auction, rather than trying to inflate the price.
The text I linked below argues that yes, you can bid on your own item even in the USA auctions. The sold item/property/whatever is set in the auction contract. That contract can be won by anyone. When the item is set to be auctioned, it is no-ones at that point, but the auction contracts'. Again, being the owner of the item doesn't increase or decrease ones ability to also act as a bidder. It's a form of reserve price, if you want to think about it that way. If I'm selling a car worth $20,000 and the bid only gets up to $10,000. I can't just yell, I bid 1 billion dollars! To save me from having to sell the car.
Yes, yes you actually can. Auctions are not always "penny auctions" or "forced sale" auctions. Auctions are not always to get rid of the item at any price. I found this text when Googling about this: https://mikebrandlyauctioneer.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/can-the-seller-bid-at-auction/ |
|
|
|
This has been discussed across multiple threads multiple times over the last several months, and unfortunately Anduck flat out refuses to even consider that he may be in the wrong here, despite overwhelming consensus against him. I'm not sure there is any point continuing this line of discussion.
Vod blackmailing me and then red-rating me when I don't remove my rating, that's not what I should be silent about or am wrong about. The consensus seems to be on my side about this, as should be. The only question here still is that auction -- which is btw unrelated to the Vod's unjust rating. (It's just the only tool Vod could find against me, as he was also on my side that it's not untrustworthy to self-bid, right on the same day his "opinion" changed due to certain events unrelated to the auction.) all you had to say was "You're right, I should have just set a reserve price or started the auction at a higher price. It won't happen again."
I did say that, many times. I should've done all that. Yet what I did was not scamming or dishonest in any way. Your ongoing arguing that somehow paying yourself to win your own auction is legitimate is making you appear more less trustworthy the longer it continues.
It is legitimate. People can have different opinions, but it is legitimate nonetheless. I understand that many (at first) see it as not, as people are not really familiar with auction standards, but it truly is not scamming or dishonesty in any way. It's a common practice in Finland and around Europe, at least. It sounds wrong, but when thinking more about it, it's really not. At worst, it's inconvenient and I agree with that -- hence defining auctions more carefully since that. |
|
|
|
Are you talking about an auctioneer that doesn't own an item legitimately purchasing it from an auction for themselves? You are the seller, you bid on your own item. Its shill bidding.
Talking about an auctioneer who owns or doesn't own the auctioned item. Legitimately purchasing it from the auction for themselves. The auctioneer is just the technical operator of the auction and has no say in how the auction rolls. Therefore he's on the same level with other bidders, he has no decreased or increased position to act as a bidder too. The word "shill" itself refers to something being done in hidden. Nothing was done in hidden in my auction. There was no attempts to falsify bidding activity, which is what shill bidding is. Also:  Also: Here's something related to this: https://mikebrandlyauctioneer.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/can-the-seller-bid-at-auction/Therefore, if the seller bids then a reserve has been placed on the property selling — thus the auction would have to be a “with reserve” auction, and not a “without reserve” auction. The default in U.S. law (if that interests someone) is that all auctions are with reserve. More about this earlier in this thread. |
|
|
|
It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers?
When you place a bid, you are entering a legal contract to purchase an item at the price you have offered, . You can't enter a contract with yourself, so bids by yourself are void. It was a crime punished by execution in Rome (same as fractional reserve banking  ) Ebay is a good source for information regarding auction fraud actually. Bidding on your own auctions is called shill bidding, and is a felony in the US, and Europe. Of course, until there is a court case that proves me otherwise, I'd say that auctions done informally in a thread on a forum are honor bound at best. I doubt someone here could successfully press charges against someone for shill bidding, however my point is that its not something you can just brush off as a no big deal type of thing. Shill bidding is bidding on the auction by using other people or accounts to drive the price up. Shill bidding is not the same as auctioneer bidding on the item. Ebay only talks about shill bidding, not self-bidding as self-bidding is not even possible on their platform. Shill bidding is a crime, yes, but self-bidding is not. Otherwise many auction houses in Europe would operate illegally. Hope the difference between auctioneer bid and shill bid is now clarified. They're totally different things. First one is a type of concealed reserve price while the latter is dishonest activity to fake price up. |
|
|
|
Thank you for a good post. Appreciated. I don't follow your logic here. If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better. Also regardless of this Vod abuse case.
Yeah no, that's a weird way of seeing things, but very prevalent. Why would you want to be on DT even, so that you could give Vod a taste of his own medicine? And then what? Honestly, you can just stop giving a fuck about the trust score of yours because it DOESN'T MATTER(FUN FACT!), and if you really are persistent on this, ignore vod from your trust lists, you could try persuading DT1 members to remove Vod but that is highly unlikely. What's weird about "If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better."? I can't choose if DT exists or not. If it exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, I think it would be better for everybody. As it does exist now, I could maybe do something to make it better by being on it myself. As said in earlier posts, I would want Vod to go back to "let's resolve this personal issue" mindset. He had that when he thought that I were on DT as well. I wouldn't care about my trust score very much, but I know it does affect my trading activity in here. It's just how it is, sadly. Not everyone can go and see the ratings.. Many (often new people) just dismiss users without deep green trust score, for certain things. What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
DT is definitely not that type of lists. It isn't right now, but that's what it should be and was made for. The current situation is beyond ridiculous. DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.
Or... There's another possible and realistic reason and that is: Vod has given out so many ratings to people that are actually valid and rock solid, and removing him for one rating is just outright stupid. Removing Vod would only lead to more chaos than this. Vod shouldn't have done what he did about him asking you to remove his ratings, but he did it anyway, naivety happens, but he could try making up for it, its his wish. And by making I don't necessarily mean to remove the rating completely. This case isn't complex, either people are way too stupid to understand(which they are) or they don't care enough. What you described is my option #1. It's just one case, not worth enough to override good deeds of Vod. Removing him for one rating would be bad, yes. This case is actually quite complex (at least to me even though I lived it.) It escalated way beyond what it should have. Vod blocked me and refuses all direct communications. I provoked him a bit by telling him that I don't necessarily see him as trustworthy.. Shouldn't have said that to him, right! Still not my fault that he abuses his position against me now. Basically his misunderstanding on top of his misunderstanding, and Vod not wanting to go back to that and understand his misunderstandings. Add a big ego and elevated position to this and you have a nice DT abuse case ready. How is adding you to DT changing anything?
Would maybe make Vod think about his behavior and would maybe make him want to find a resolution, just like when he thought I was on DT. I assume this "will to seek for resolution" would happen as it happened when he thought I was on DT. Also I would obviously do what I can to portray DT as the list of people unlikely to scam, and nothing else. |
|
|
|
It's dishonest to do so without disclosing such possibility. You've been told this numerous times but you keep omitting this part.
Nothing was stated about any kind of any reserve. According to USA auction standards, the standard is that there is a reserve. No auction rules were broken. Possibly only inconvenience and wasted time, and I've learned to not cause such again, so I've been stating the existence of reserve or no reserve since. All in all, disclosing such possibility is not required. Auction rules simply did not state anything about reserve, hidden or disclosed or no reserve. |
|
|
|
Ognasty and others, go see e.g. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=51173 e.g. BayAreaCoins rating. That's a case where auction rules were changed during auction by mprep. But I know nobody will do anything about it. OgNasty even has him on his trust list... Go ask USA auction houses what they think about that. I can tell you that auction rules should never be changed during auction, and is not accepted by any standards anywhere. Thread about that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3147489.0 |
|
|
|
What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
users with good judgement
Giving someone positive trust means you think they are unlikely to scam. Adding someone to DT (I hope) means you trust their judgement on others situations, their honesty, morality, and believe they would always strive to do the right thing even when it may not be in their best interest to do so. Shouldn't it be this way: "Giving someone positive trust means you think they are unlikely to scam." Exactly. And adding someone on DT means you trust their judgement to do the same -- nothing more. Why is DT not like this and why do you think it shouldn't be like this instead of your view of it? As I commented months ago on the first thread you created on this matter I think a policy non-escalation from you would have been the best from the very beginning.
Agree. I attempted that. Vod misunderstood me. Vod wanted resolve this when he thought I was on DT, but when realizing I was not on DT, he first blackmailed/threatened me and then blocked me. See the PM conversation. |
|
|
|
As I commented months ago on the first thread you created on this matter I think a policy non-escalation from you would have been the best from the very beginning. That along with admitting and repenting for your mistake likely would have solved the issue before you had to start any thread at all. Which you still won't.. It's not unethical for auctioneer to bid on an auction.
You really still feel that way after so many respected members have tried to correct your viewpoint? It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers? But you still are not satisfied even though you are back in the black.
The wrongdoing hasn't changed at all. Now you are asking to be added to DT because you feel the only solution is for your multiple retaliatory feedbacks left on him to hold as much weight as his on you.
Retaliatory? Vod blackmailed me, lies about me in his rating (I did not admit anything to him even though he claims so), rated me 2 years after the auction event he uses as his main argument etc. Again DT should not be any kind of elite club. It should merely include those who are unlikely to scam others. It's that simple.. Or should be that simple, but is apparently not. I think asking for DT is questionably shady
It should not be an elite club where only the bestest of the best are invited. I see nothing wrong in asking to be added to the list of people unlikely to scam others. Tell me what DT should be if it's not what I describe it should be. Also I'm very interested in how you see the DT... as obviously you see it as something else than "list of people unlikely to scam others". |
|
|
|
You want DT to add you or go away. Got it.
Optimal solution would be if Vod analyzed his behavior and removed his rating. As that's not going to happen (at least when I'm not also on DT), and DT1's are not going to exclude Vod, the only remaining option is DT reform/removal. Me being on DT would possibly help achieve the optimal solution. Solutions to fixing DT completely would be a reform / removal. The above are regarding this abuse case. So shortly: I think that optimal solution for my case would be if Vod stopped this abuse/harassing. Optimal solution for the forum would be to reform/remove DT. how the top action house laughed at me for questioning if it was.
Laughing doesn't mean they think it as scamming or dishonest behavior. Also, this is TOTALLY NORMAL in my country. I'm not in the States. You continuing to argue that you did nothing wrong is ridiculous.
Who did I scam? How were I dishonest? I did nothing wrong. Think about it! The only thing there was inconvenience caused to some people due to BCT auction practice-formed standards not being met. Auction rules were same for everyone, including me. Vod told me he finds nothing in what I did as untrustworthy ("I decided what you did wasn't untrustworthy to me"). After blackmailing me and failing at it, he red-rated me using this auction as the reason. Tell me who was scammed and how, and what was the wrongdoing in my auction. Are people who agree with me here regarding self-bidding ridiculous as well? Like theymos? You wanting on DT when you think it should be abolished is equally ridiculous.
I don't follow your logic here. If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better. Also regardless of this Vod abuse case. I’ve spent enough time in PMs trying to show you the light, but you refuse to listen. You can’t be helped if you refuse to grow.
What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
