I used to be one of those who warned bidders who were bidding on fraudulent material, until one bidder flamed me and told me he'd report me to ebay for butting into it. Obviously he was the seller shilling his own fraudulent merchandise. Then I started writing to the sellers and advising them in a friendly way that what they were selling might no be kosher. Most thanked me for educating them, some didn't respond, and some said "how do I know that you know anything about it? I am leaving it as is". I am finally trying to swallow the bitter truth that I can't save everyone, no matter how hard I try. Believe it or not that's why I did these things, because I can't stand to think of someone being purposely defrauded. But it really doesn't affect me in a personal way, and what Peter wrote here really spoke to me. If people can't do a little research, maybe it is just too bad if they get stung...I certainly research whatever I buy if I am not sure about it. John Robles
[email protected] wrote: gee, i just had a flash. this may be unpopular, but my opinion is that if these bidders have the money to toss at toys and luxury goods such as these, they just might also have the brains to do the research and protect themselves...without our "help." and if they don't, well, it's not our responsibility to bail them out. caveat emptor is the rule on ebay, whether we like it or not. if we can detect problems with the representation of an item from the listing, so can they...and if they can't, why are they spending the big bucks? there are tons of instant-gratification freaks out there on ebay - why hunt it down and do the research and leanr about stuff when i can just click-and-grin? it also just may be that they have plenty of disposable income. disposable like burning it, or flushing it, or tossing it out of a window...or buying a fake clock! that's my 2 cents' worth...or you can Buy It Now for a quarter!!! -- peter [email protected] Richard Rubin wrote: > Here's an ethical question, which unfortunately could not have applied to > the Edison clock in question, since the biddes' IDs were hidden: In > situations where a bidder list is viewable and the item in question is > clearly being misrepresented, how would you all feel about contacting > bidders before the auction ends and letting them know your misgivings? > (If > only there were some way to alert people BEFORE they bid.) What, in your > opinions, are the moral and ethical implications in this? > > --RR > > >>From: Loran Hughes >>Reply-To: Antique Phonograph List >>To: Antique Phonograph List >>Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Something Worth Remembering >>Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:05:06 -0800 >> >>On Mar 10, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Dennis Back wrote: >> > >> > I too, wrote the seller, with no reply back. All I >> > can say is...what goes around, comes around. The >> > seller will eventually get what he deserves in the >> > end. >> >>As a matter of fact, I'll be updating my "crap-o-phone" page this >>weekend to include these clocks and Chinese crap-o-phones. I also >>have a catalog put out by a company in India with their complete >>product line (yikes!), which I may show sans contact info. >> >>Loran >>_______________________________________________ >>Phono-L mailing list >>[email protected] >> >>Phono-L Archive >>http://www.oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > [email protected] > > Phono-L Archive > http://www.oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/ > _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list [email protected] Phono-L Archive http://www.oldcrank.org/pipermail/phono-l/
