Trust system abuse / DT2 member Vod is provably dishonestly rating people

[o_e_l_e_o]

Whether or not the practice was scammy has be discussed ad nauseam already in this thread. I would refer back to my previous statement on the matter:

I would draw everyone's attention to the Uniform Commercial Code of the United States, which states in section 2-328 (4):

If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller's behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has not been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at his option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last good faith bid prior to the completion of the sale. [Emphasis added]

You did not provide advance notice, therefore you acted unlawfully.

First of all, nobody was scammed. Auction was held according to the stated rules.

I don't remember if we got an answer to the question of whether you sold the item to the highest bidder that wasn't you at the price of their original bid. If you didn't, then they were scammed out of a fair win. Regardless, however, a scam does not have to have happened for someone to be labelled a scammer, which is commonplace across the forum.

Also, the auction was not held according to the stated rules, as you never stated your intentional to bid on your own auction.

It doesn't present to an individual as a huge mess unless you're a victim of it. Many are. Naturally you don't feel the pain, because your say actually weights, due to being in DT.

The Pharmacist received negative trust from a DT member literally last week. However, he admitted he was in the wrong and made amends, and so now the red trust is no more. You flat out refuse to admit that not disclosing your intention to bid on your own auction was untrustworthy behavior (which it is in the eyes of the law, as I've outlined above).

[Anduck]

Whether or not the practice was scammy has be discussed ad nauseam already in this thread. I would refer back to my previous statement on the matter:

I would draw everyone's attention to the Uniform Commercial Code of the United States, which states in section 2-328 (4):

If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller's behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has not been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at his option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last good faithbid prior to the completion of the sale. [Emphasis added]

You did not provide advance notice, therefore you acted unlawfully.

Read the quote you quoted. There's nothing unlawful or scammy in this behavior. Not providing advance notice doesn't make it unlawful or scammy. Also, for the sake of it, I'm not US citizen. Also, as I've said earlier, I will (and have since) presented clearly if there's a reserve price of any kind. This is to increase transparency, as concealed reserve price is not common here.

Btw, the same section you quoted also says:

§ 2-328. Sale by Auction.
(3) Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale.

First of all, nobody was scammed. Auction was held according to the stated rules.

I don't remember if we got an answer to the question of whether you sold the item to the highest bidder that wasn't you at the price of their original bid. If you didn't, then they were scammed out of a fair win. Regardless, however, a scam does not have to have happened for someone to be labelled a scammer, which is commonplace across the forum.

The item was sold to the highest bidder, that being me. Second highest bidder did not win the item. Yes, I was also the auctioneer of the item. Your definition of a scam, or attempted scam, or whatever related to scamming, seems to be out of the line.

[suchmoon]

The item was sold to the highest bidder, that being me. Second highest bidder did not win the item. Yes, I was also the auctioneer of the item. Your definition of a scam, or attempted scam, or whatever related to scamming, seems to be out of the line.

You didn't disclose the conditions of your auction in advance. That is a deceptive practice and it's great to have a warning on your trust page so that future bidders on your auctions could decide to not waste their time with you if they don't want to get cheated out of their win.

[Anduck]

The item was sold to the highest bidder, that being me. Second highest bidder did not win the item. Yes, I was also the auctioneer of the item. Your definition of a scam, or attempted scam, or whatever related to scamming, seems to be out of the line.

You didn't disclose the conditions of your auction in advance. That is a deceptive practice and it's great to have a warning on your trust page so that future bidders on your auctions could decide to not waste their time with you if they don't want to get cheated out of their win.

Read the message above.

I did not specify that the auction is without reserve. As you can see, the US law sees auctions without specific notice of no reserve as having reserve by default. You don't know much about auctions when you're claiming that deceptive actions were done by me.

Btw, how deceptive do you see Vod's proven lies and scam accusations? Faked quotes, faked attributions? Lies on top of lies? Why don't you comment any of that?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Btw, the same section you quoted also says:

§ 2-328. Sale by Auction.
(3) Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale.

Irrelevant, since we are discussing a previously unannounced self bid and not a reserve price. Your practice was at best untrustworthy, and if it were a real auction house, illegal.

[suchmoon]

Read the message above.

I did not specify that the auction is without reserve. As you can see, the US law sees auctions without specific notice of no reserve as having reserve by default. You don't know much about auctions when you're claiming that deceptive actions were done by me.

Btw, how deceptive do you see Vod's proven lies and scam accusations? Faked quotes, faked attributions? Lies on top of lies? Why don't you comment any of that?

Trust system doesn't enforce the law or even forum rules. Vod thinks your behavior is scammy. I appreciate Vod's warning because regardless of what the law says I wouldn't want to waste my time on auction where you can decide to cancel it at any time.

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly that makes you look less trustworthy.

[Anduck]

Btw, the same section you quoted also says:

§ 2-328. Sale by Auction.
(3) Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the sale.

Irrelevant, since we are discussing a previously unannounced self bid and not a reserve price. Your practice was at best untrustworthy, and if it were a real auction house, illegal.

In a real auction house, completely normal. Being a technical operator of the auction process doesn't add or remove any capability to act as a bidder. Your opinions have no say in this. In any case, nobody was scammed and Vod is spreading bullshit in various ways. How about going back to on-topic and starting to digest that (the abuse done by DT members)?

[Anduck]

Read the message above.

I did not specify that the auction is without reserve. As you can see, the US law sees auctions without specific notice of no reserve as having reserve by default. You don't know much about auctions when you're claiming that deceptive actions were done by me.

Btw, how deceptive do you see Vod's proven lies and scam accusations? Faked quotes, faked attributions? Lies on top of lies? Why don't you comment any of that?

Trust system doesn't enforce the law or even forum rules. Vod thinks your behavior is scammy. I appreciate Vod's warning because regardless of what the law says I wouldn't want to waste my time on auction where you can decide to cancel it at any time.

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly that makes you look less trustworthy.

I'm aware of that the trust system has nothing to do with following or enforcing the law. As you can see, the US law was brought up by o_e_l_e_o and I was replying to him.

Vod "thinks" that my behavior is scammy, yes. Earlier he said he sees nothing wrong in that. How much do you trust someone whose "opinion" changes like that? His opinion suddenly changed after I told him that I don't specifically trust him. I think he thought he had earned some status in my eyes -- he hadn't but now he has.

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you.

Untrue. Read the thread. There's discussion about the possible ways to improve DT system and reduce abuse of it. Vod is a nice example of how the DT system is abused. His current rating towards me consists of a quite unwarranted claim of me scamming someone, and of proven lies where he claims I've admitted to scamming. Try to see the forest instead of one tree.

[Quickseller]

It looks like a ton of new people, especially non-English speakers, think that DT are staff/moderators. They're not entirely wrong. After all, DT members *are* capable of effectively "banning" accounts from conducting any business here.

That's not true, though.  I've seen cases where people with negs from DT have no trouble whatsoever doing deals here, depending on what the feedback was for, of course.  A lot of members apparently don't even check a person's trust page before deciding whether to transact with that person--and that's how many of them get scammed, too.

There are exceptions to all of this, however in general, someone who joins the forum for the purpose of conducting business will also otherwise contribute to the community, but only as long as they can continue conducting business. So if something is substantially impeding their ability to conduct business, they will stop contributing otherwise to the community. Also, on its face, having the warning to trade with extreme caution is going to prevent you from trading, and as such, many people will not even attempt to continue trading. This is not the case on this forum, however many other forums ban scammers from trading and some people may have seen elsewhere that those who are "tagged" as scammers cannot continue to trade. For those that attempt to continue trading after having their warning to trade with extreme caution on their profile and marketplace posts, few are able to conduct any meaningful business.   

[suchmoon]

There are exceptions to all of this, however in general, someone who joins the forum for the purpose of conducting business will also otherwise contribute to the community, but only as long as they can continue conducting business. So if something is substantially impeding their ability to conduct business, they will stop contributing otherwise to the community. Also, on its face, having the warning to trade with extreme caution is going to prevent you from trading, and as such, many people will not even attempt to continue trading. This is not the case on this forum, however many other forums ban scammers from trading and some people may have seen elsewhere that those who are "tagged" as scammers cannot continue to trade. For those that attempt to continue trading after having their warning to trade with extreme caution on their profile and marketplace posts, few are able to conduct any meaningful business.   

Wrong thread?

Where does it say "extreme caution" on Anduck's profile?

[Anduck]

There are exceptions to all of this, however in general, someone who joins the forum for the purpose of conducting business will also otherwise contribute to the community, but only as long as they can continue conducting business. So if something is substantially impeding their ability to conduct business, they will stop contributing otherwise to the community. Also, on its face, having the warning to trade with extreme caution is going to prevent you from trading, and as such, many people will not even attempt to continue trading. This is not the case on this forum, however many other forums ban scammers from trading and some people may have seen elsewhere that those who are "tagged" as scammers cannot continue to trade. For those that attempt to continue trading after having their warning to trade with extreme caution on their profile and marketplace posts, few are able to conduct any meaningful business.    

Wrong thread?

Where does it say "extreme caution" on Anduck's profile?

It used to, and Vod even kept it so by posting a second negative rating (when someone countered his shit rating) to remove others' ability to "neutralize" it until my profile was red for the time Vod wanted. And right now he has reduced my "trust score" from dark green to yellow or something like that -- I don't even know because Vod is on my distrust list due to his illogical & dishonest conduct of rating people.

Can you start reading the material before commenting nonsense?

[suchmoon]

Can you start reading the material before commenting nonsense?

As a younger me once said:

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly that makes you look less trustworthy.

You're insisting on being dishonest to your auction bidders. Deal with consequences.

[Anduck]

Can you start reading the material before commenting nonsense?

As a younger me once said:

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly that makes you look less trustworthy.

You're insisting on being dishonest to your auction bidders. Deal with consequences.

There was no dishonesty. Can you stop being derogatory? It is absolutely not my fault that some power hungry child like Vod is allowed, by community, to misuse his position freely. You're trying to steer the narrative to paint me as the bad one. I don't know about your agenda, but you obviously have some reasons to completely ignore all proven wrongdoing by Vod. It's one of the main topics of this thread, making you ignore it is even more bizarre.

At best (for your talking point), not enough transparency and then some expectations were not met in that auction you keep grinding about. Yet no scamming or dishonesty happened. Nothing was specified about a reserve, doesn't make it dishonest to have it. What's the default: no reserve or reserve? In US auctions the latter, if that matters for you. Anyway, since that one occasion 2+ years ago, I've always mentioned which way it is. And again, this thread is not about that. This is about Vod and others abusing and misusing the DT system and ways to make DT better to avoid such abuse.

This thread is about obvious misuse and proven lies & dishonesty done by DT members, presenting a case of DT2 member abusing his position against me. There are various other cases too, which I'm sure you're familiar with. Possibly something to do with your silence regarding Vod's DT abuse/misuse. But that's not related to this thread, really. The problem is in the system, not really in specific people using in it.

Again I'm asking you: Are you going to read the material before commenting? Or will you just keep on slandering me and derailing the discussion?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

This of course doesn't mean that *everyone* will be unable to conduct business with *everyone*.

Which of course is not the claim that I made. 

Alright. I don't really understand why you're highlighting that you "would check carefully to see that you hadn't employed a shill on an auction of yours".

You better believe I would, because you've demonstrated that you don't know how auctions work and once you've learned the hard way that bidding on your own auction with your own name isn't tolerated, the next thing to do would be to have a member with a different username do it. 

This is completely normal in various auctions, but not in bitcointalk auctions -- which I learned back then.

Please give some examples of auction sites/auction houses where a person can place a bid on his own auction if he thinks the price isn't high enough (or for whatever reason).

You have the tools to work against potential abusers, which there are not too many, because who would go against someone with a gun? I'm with no gun, so Vod can currently freely misuse his position against me.

Are we both on bitcointalk here or what?  This forum is rife with abuse, potential abuse, you name it--and there are many who couldn't care less about the trust system here because as I mentioned, there are many people here who don't even check people's trust feedbacks or just ignore them.

You might have called me intellecually dishonest, but I think you're intellectually challenged based on everything you've written here.

[Anduck]

This of course doesn't mean that *everyone* will be unable to conduct business with *everyone*.

Which of course is not the claim that I made.  

You're correct. I said that DT members are capable of effectively "banning" people from conducting business. You said that it is untrue. You're wrong. The sentence you quoted is not talking about that -- it's merely an additional note, and yes, that is not the claim you made. The claim you made is that DT members are *not* capable of effectively "banning" people from conducting business. I disagree with that. Do I interpret this correctly, or am I failing at something here?

Alright. I don't really understand why you're highlighting that you "would check carefully to see that you hadn't employed a shill on an auction of yours".

You better believe I would, because you've demonstrated that you don't know how auctions work and once you've learned the hard way that bidding on your own auction with your own name isn't tolerated, the next thing to do would be to have a member with a different username do it.  

This is completely normal in various auctions, but not in bitcointalk auctions -- which I learned back then.

Please give some examples of auction sites/auction houses where a person can place a bid on his own auction if he thinks the price isn't high enough (or for whatever reason).

You're free to do what you want. However, I believe I know very well how auctions work. Auctioneer bidding on the auctioned item is perfectly fine around the world in various auctions. It's a form of concealed reserve price. But again, this thread is not about that. This thread is about DT misuse/abuse conducted by Vod. Some old auction and what you think about it has *nothing* to do with that. You can come to Finland to see auctions live, where auctioneer is sometimes bidding on the auction too. Auctioneer is simply in charge of the technical process of the auction and being in that role does not increase or decrease his/her ability to act as a bidder too. Some people, apparently in Bitcointalk it's the norm, see auctions as "seller must sell" -- that's however not a rule of any kind. The norm is, or maybe was, actually the contrary. Penny auctions and such have steered peoples understanding of auctions to be like that. Try to remember online auctions of early 2000. It used to be quite different. These days trust issues in e.g. ebay are very real. But this is all off-topic here.

You have the tools to work against potential abusers, which there are not too many, because who would go against someone with a gun? I'm with no gun, so Vod can currently freely misuse his position against me.

Are we both on bitcointalk here or what?  This forum is rife with abuse, potential abuse, you name it--and there are many who couldn't care less about the trust system here because as I mentioned, there are many people here who don't even check people's trust feedbacks or just ignore them.

You might have called me intellecually dishonest, but I think you're intellectually challenged based on everything you've written here.

Could be, but this case is actually quite clear and crisp. It's just somewhat long read, and obviously many people commenting in this thread -- or similar threads for the sake of it -- do not read half of what they're commenting about.

Vod is never even participating in Collectibles section and has nothing to with any of these things. He rated me simply because I told him I don't specifically trust him. This is how EGO works.

What particularly makes you think that I'm intellectually challenged? It's very clear and obvious how Vod is misusing his position as a DT member. His rating to me contains a proven lie. He says I've admitted to scamming. I've not admitted to scamming. By reading his posts in these threads, he's obviously understanding his own misunderstanding of my words to him, intentionally or not, as "lying". After he was corrected (ie. told how he misunderstood it illogically), his ego could not let go. He's defining "scamming" to mean something else than the consensus understands as "scamming". Are you really fine with this sort of bending?

Does it mean that anything said by anyone can always be bent to "mean" something else to someone, therefore reasoning whatever actions? This is bullshit and everyone knows it. So focus on that! It's happening here, and this thread is about that too -- it's one of the ways DT members abuse their position.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Auctioneer bidding on the auctioned item is perfectly fine around the world in various auctions. It's a form of concealed reserve price.

I have never, never heard about auctions who allow a person auctioning an item to bid on it in order to set a concealed reserve price.    Again, do you have examples of auction houses that allow that?  Do they allow the person to withdraw their bid if someone doesn't bid above it?  

Reserve prices are usually concealed, and that's understandable.  What's inconceivable to me is that anyone would do it like you did when there are no rules set about such things by bitcointalk, and you did not include such a rule in your auction.  Bidding on your own items is NOT standard in the auction industry.

And you know what?  People made all the valid arguments I could possibly make about this already in this thread.  You messed up and were dishonest, you got tagged for it, and now you think it's somehow the fault of DT members who wield their power as a weapon.  Ain't so.

[Anduck]

Auctioneer bidding on the auctioned item is perfectly fine around the world in various auctions. It's a form of concealed reserve price.

I have never, never heard about auctions who allow a person auctioning an item to bid on it in order to set a "concealed reserve price".     Again, do you have examples of auction houses that allow that?  Do they allow the person to withdraw their bid if someone doesn't bid above it?  

You want examples? For example, come to Finland and join the local auction houses. Come see it. AFAIK, they do not allow bids to be withdrawn. How is that related anyway?

Reserve prices are usually concealed, and that's understandable.  What's inconceivable to me is that anyone would do it like you did when there are no rules set about such things by bitcointalk, and you did not include such a rule in your auction.  Bidding on your own items is NOT standard in the auction industry.

It not being a standard, in your understanding, makes it scamming / dishonest? Vod said he thinks nothing dishonest was done. Theymos said the same. Think about it and end up in the same result. Rules are same for everyone. Obviously stating if there is a reserve, or if there's not reserve, is a better approach. I've done that since this. A mere inconvenience / unclarity about how the auction works is not dishonesty or scamming. The default, at least in the US law, is that auctions come with a reserve price. You can see the quoted part in earlier posts. I understand that this forum follows no laws, but still how come you think that no reserve is the default in auctions in general? It's simply your view / expectation about how it should be, and going against it has nothing to do with scamming or dishonesty.

And you know what?  People made all the valid arguments I could possibly make about this already in this thread.  You messed up and were dishonest, you got tagged for it, and now you think it's somehow the fault of DT members who wield their power as a weapon.  Ain't so.

That is bullshit. I am not tagged for this auction. Read up.

It's absolutely a fault of a DT member to lie in his rating. Just this time Vod got caught. Yet you ignore it. Let me be as clear as possibly about this:

Vod's current red rating to me states the following: "Also admitted to me in PM he lied about this matter."

There is no PM existing where that happens. It's a lie made to back his earlier lie where I, claimed by him, scam people. Here's a proof of wrongdoing by a DT member. What is your action regarding it? I know: silence.

And what about those fake quotes, backpedaling and lies about who made them? Then getting caught again for bullshit. And again: silence.

[Anduck]

In addition to all what has been presented so far, here's something new: I've been non-directly asked to take a side on this stupid ongoing DT wars. People who have been paying attention know what has happened. When I did not join a "tribe" on, and against, certain people, it did cost me the "support" of that side. Both/all sides of this stupidity are wrong, and right, in a sense. DT system is currently a very brutal and nasty game.

What I'm seeing? Activity against me in various ways. I guess it's the "if you're not with us, you're against us" idea.

[LoyceV]

Auctioneer bidding on the auctioned item is perfectly fine around the world in various auctions. It's a form of concealed reserve price.

I have never, never heard about auctions who allow a person auctioning an item to bid on it in order to set a concealed reserve price.    Again, do you have examples of auction houses that allow that?

I can imagine an auction house allows that if they take 10-15% commission. And if the seller bids 20 million on his own item, I can imagine they don't mind taking 2-3 million of his money as commission so that he can buy back his own item.
That high commission makes it very unattractive to the seller to do.

You say it's allowed under US law. Personally, I have nothing to do with their law, as I'm not in their country. Whether it's allowed or not, it strikes me as "weird" to bid on your own auction, and it's certainly not something I would expect to happen. And I'm not the only one. In your auction thread, you surprised wheelz1200, Lairew, acharias, Lincoln6Echo and minerjones.

On the other hand, thread USER ANDUCK Bidding on own auction.. was opened 1.5 years after the auction, and based on User Vod abusing DT position (petty red-rating with provable lies as a reason) it really looks like a personal conflict between the two of you.

[suchmoon]

Yet no scamming or dishonesty happened.

Must be language barrier. I have no other way to explain how you can keep claiming that failing to disclose the existence of reserve and/or your intent to bid isn't dishonest.

Nothing was specified about a reserve, doesn't make it dishonest to have it. What's the default: no reserve or reserve? In US auctions the latter, if that matters for you. Anyway, since that one occasion 2+ years ago, I've always mentioned which way it is.

Huh? Why? It was all perfectly honest without it, no?

I have no idea what a "US auction" is but e.g. on eBay that's definitely not the case and probably not the case in most Bitcointalk auctions. So which is more likely to be true for someone bidding on your auction: they expect some cockamamie "default" that is not disclosed anywhere (including your own fine print) or they expect eBay-like rules, or similar to other Bitcointalk auctions?

The few offline auctions I've been to (foreclosure, estate, etc) typically have a flier with the T&Cs or a brief announcement of the terms and reserve rules are always clearly spelled out. Online you have to check a box on the T&Cs, same thing. I have never seen an auction that would have reserve/floor prices AND would not mention that anywhere and I would consider that a particularly shitty practice.

And again, this thread is not about that. This is about Vod and others abusing and misusing the DT system and ways to make DT better to avoid such abuse.

Your auction was deceptive. Vod's rating is fine. The counter-rating is fine. System worked as expected in your case. Don't be a sore winner.

Again I'm asking you: Are you going to read the material before commenting? Or will you just keep on slandering me and derailing the discussion?

All you've done here for 19 pages is attack anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly that makes you look less trustworthy.