Has anyone ever sued someone for offering a card for sale and then not selling it to the person who claimed it?

Peter, your examples do not match the circumstances present here. The seller did not simply provide a price. He provided sufficient other terms such that he manifested an intent to sell to anyone who wanted to accept.

*

Here is another legal statement that is so far off base it's actually funny. In reality (and in the law) the seller (or buyer) can make an offer or accept an offer. It depends on the circumstances.

Unless there is a clear statement of intent to be bound, the law also agrees with Peter and I on that statement.

It's weird that you keep chiming in to make conclusory statements about the law, but never address the mountain of case law contradicting your conclusions.

What were those terms sufficient to manifest an intent to sell to anyone who would accept?

You keep saying that, but they have never been posted here. And the legal standard is a "clear statement of intend to be bound," not sufficient terms.

LOL, yeah, when you take statements out of context you can draw strange conclusions. However, I made it quite clear that I was talking about this circumstance (an ad on a message board), and I qualified it by stating that the only way that changes is if there is a clear statement of intent to be bound.

Keep cherry picking statements, and ignore the fact that your assertions of the law are dead wrong.

Hey look! I can do it to.

This statement is so far off based it isn't funny. It has no basis in contract law and is false. Material terms being included in a sales listing does not turn it into an offer. It must also include a clear statement of intent to be bound.

The complaint in this case (at least on my part) is that I have to read through a long thread of tangentially related law office water cooler talk to see if there's any new information about the original topic, which is what I came to the thread looking for.

I did not say I can never learn; in fact, I learn something in this forum most every day– just not from you. I have no problem with making a legal point, supporting it and moving on, although again, here your “free legal advice”, while perhaps interesting to some in a general to abstract sense, is very unlikely to influence any activity on the b/s/t because the law is really not the issue and no one here is going to court. Nonetheless, saying it one or twice in a thread that could benefit from other relevant input is fine– but revisiting it over and over for days is, in terms you can understand, exceeding your page limits, counselor. We get it, point made, move on, or if not, please understand and hopefully appreciate that some here find legal wrangling at length to be stifling if not boorish.

And just as you say that I could or should ignore this thread, so too can you ignore my posts. The topic of etiquette and protocol in b/s/t does interest me-- I didn't begin reading it for no reason. However, since this thread has essentially little chance of addressing any further what I was hoping to be a discussion of etiquette and protocol, such as how to properly handle or clarify listings where multiple card discounts are offered (oops, I mean invited), I will wait for another one to emerge down the road.

Well said.

All he did was list prices and say he took Paypal and Venmo. No different than a store showing Visa and Mastercard logos or whatever the right word is. That doesn't change anything. IF that's a binding offer then so too are the ones in my examples -- but we know those are not.

I find endless discussions of T206 backs and combinations stifling and boring, so I don't read them. How hard is that?

Maybe you can't learn anything from me, but there have already been comments in this thread saying they have learned useful information regarding b/s/t activity, including the forum owner of the forum. So get off your high horse.

Second, I only posted in this thread in response to other posts. I did not come here and say the same thing over and over. I responded to specific posts with a specific response to that post. When someone repeatedly comes here and gives incorrect legal advice, just posting once and moving on does nothing to address the repeated posts containing inaccurate information.

But next time I am trying to figure out how many times I can post in response to someone else's post I'll be sure to ask the message board police what the post limit is. I assume you are the chief of that department?

Yes, please consider me the chief of the message board police, at least when it relates to you. Now that was easy, no?

So you wouldn't like it if people starting talking about t206 backs and combinations in a conversation you were following on a different but somewhat related topic?

I would just skip over them. As anyone not interested in the law easily could have skipped over posts by Tim, Greg and myself once it was obvious that's where our focus was.

In other news, the weather sure is great in Los Angeles. How is it in your neck of the woods?

At the risk of offending someone for posting off topic, nice day today in Boston, it's warmed up from the recent polar vortex cold.

We digress…

Maybe it's time for Leon to create a separate section called LOL (Lawyers Opposing Lawyers) where attorneys can endlessly argue semantics
and whatnot with each other to their heart's content while allowing the rest of us (who speak and think like regular collectors) to just enjoy the site again? :rolleyes:

Oh, I don't know, I think it's entertaining for many, myself included. No one has to open a thread, though it's sort of human nature to. :eek:

The rabbit holes (old, long threads I go back and read for no apparent reason) are much worse for me.
.

Weather sucks here in Ohio.

But I'm heading to Arizona in a couple weeks to watch some spring training games. Looking forward to seeing what that "dry heat" is all about. ;)

The last time I was in Phoenix, it was 110 degrees. Dry or not, it was beyond brutal to be outside even for a couple o fminutes.

Awesome, here in rural South Dakota also. It was -6 for a high last Wednesday and a high of 60 today.

It hit 90 in Phoenix yesterday, almost 20 degrees above average for the date. That 20 degree difference has not been unusual this month either.

Last year we had nearly 5 months of 100+ degree weather, including nearly 4 consecutive months of it. There was a long string of days where the temp never dipped below 90 at any time of the day--even the dead of night.

Miserable describes it for the first 30 days. After that I can't think of an adequate word.

Here in sunny SW Florida, it went up to 85F. 2 days ago we had good rain for the first time in weeks, other than a few sprinkles here and there. Spring training in full swing around here now.

Bonzo beer can turned upside down Turns into pirate with Eyepatch

Played golf today here 35 miles north of Chicago. 47 degrees and wet conditions is not perfect but it is a good walk at the least.

You're making Texas sound nice. Yikes.

For the record, Peter and Ohio Lawyer are great guys.

Some spirited banter every now and then is ok. We kept it civil!

Weather in LA this morning is a crisp 55 degrees!

Agreed. This is not personal, at all.

Yep, Greg ain't so bad himself. :p

If I took it personally every time I argued with a lawyer, the bar association meetings would get really awkward. ;)

I've done the same thing saying "I'll take it" and It was sold on another platform and they didn't mark it sold. Here' It's just the breaks of the game. You just move on.,:)BST is still a great way to buy some really nice stuff. I like it.

Wow, this thread has been way more entertaining than I could have ever imagined when I started it. I guess now would be a good time to mention that all of the conjecture surrounding the alleged transaction that caused me to post here originally was actually not the transaction that started it all. If I were to reveal the true cause of my frustration now, it would surely be anticlimactic so I’ll refrain from doing so at this time.

Well that makes sense if you don't think about it. :)

"BST is still a great way to buy some really nice stuff. I like it"

I agree. The BST is a great place. I have made lots of buys and sales over the last month. This buy, from there, was from 12/2017,for $2100....I still love looking at it. (I enjoy reasonably well centered cards)

https://luckeycards.com/williams.jpg

So it took you a week to come back and post something? Meanwhile, the person who thought he was the one responsible for your original post is left having to defend himself for something he didn't do. Not cool.

I have a few 1939 Play Ball cards...Joe DiMaggio, Hank Greenberg. So far, the Ted Williams has eluded me. That one is primo!

Which raises a related point. If someone wants to complain publicly about another member/transaction, should they be required to identify it?

I don't like requirements, personally. (says the non-conformist)

And another BST purchase. Love the BST :)


.

Probably not a forum rule but a good reason to add someone to your ignore list so you don't have to see any more of their posts.

WOW Leon that is one beautiful Ted Wiliams card.

I get both sides but I think people should either work out disputes privately or, if they're going to post publicly about them, have the cojones to tell us who you're complaining about.

If someone posts a general complaint about an issue that they want to get feedback on, maybe it makes sense to not name the person publicly in case there really is no issue.

The problem here is that someone who thought they were being accused outed themselves after someone else posted a link to a thread that the OP had recently made an offer on. At that point, I think the OP should have posted that wasn't the seller he was talking about. It shouldn't have taken a week and almost 300 subsequent posts for that to happen.

Maybe someone will have a pair of cojones for sale at the Strongsville show. Or on the BST.

I've seen many threads that are less general requests for feedback/guidance and more efforts to gain leverage in a dispute.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water...

Seriously like WTF..Talk about etiquette

I didn't know that feature exists. I guess that means you wont see this post...:p

How does the feature work? Does it just eliminate all post entries of the person on the "ignore" list from the thread being viewed? Or did you just make that up. Oh yeah, that's right, you won't see this post...:p
.
.
.
.

LOL, I can't imagine any reason to have you on my ignore list.

The only way you see someone's posts when on your ignore list is if someone quotes them like you did me. So now you made everyone ignoring me read my post.:)

On the line with the log out icon go all the way to your left. Click on user CP. Then under settings and options you can edit your ignore list. Personally I only have one person on mine and it was because of a BST incident they are on there.

Ok, a lot late here, but as described, this, at least to me would mean that the law supports shady practices like bait and switch as being entirely legal.

Like "I don't have the $50 sewing machine but I have this one for $75"

One of the events the local K mart had back in the 70's was 7 cent day - or 77 cent day I forget which. Several expensive items advertised at that price. With the catch that only one was at that price. My friend insisted that we should ride our bikes to K mart, because they put pallets of those items on the sidewalk because they didn't want the fights inside.
Total madhouse, I'd guess more inventory was destroyed in the rummage for the one item and subsequent fights than any profit that they might have had. Think like 10 mini riots on the front sidewalk of the store.

Yes Kmart did do 77 cent days, and dollar days as time went on. And yes they did put the pallets on the front sidewalk left and right of the entrance. I got some overnight duty watching those pallets of stuff...complete with bean bag chair, a cooler of food and drinks, etc. But no gun. Not real sure what I would have done to stop anyone from pilfering the goods. No cell phones back in those days. I loved working there, even though the pay wasn't so great, something like $1.75 an hour. But all the dateable girls in the neighborhood worked there, so that more than made up for the low pay!

I missed this thread because it was too similar to the last B/S/T thread. And since I enjoy talking about the music of my life more than baseball cards (although nearly being a member of the 5K on this site might belie that comment). Let me present you this you tube video of an obscure (barely made the top 40) Dionne Warwick song but in my opinion it's a goodie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8uALPvBvZs

One of the great pop singers. Impeccable style and phrasing.

Dionne Warwick at her best:

Don't Make Me Over - Dionne Warwick

There's also quite the story behind the track. Hal David and Burt Bacharach had told a young Dionne Warwick that they were working on a song for her, but ended up giving it to another singer. When Dionne demanded to know why, the two hemmed and hawed about how the other girl was better suited for the song in this, that and the other way. Knowing that it was actually because she wasn't white, Dionne burst into tears at their implied criticism of her "suitability" and snapped "Don't make me over, man, accept me for what I am!" Stunned, Hal David and Burt Bacharach looked at each other with the realization that they'd just found the exact sentiment they needed to turn their young ingenue into a recording sensation.

I like the stark contrast in the video between the very awkward young Dionne stuffed into the formal gown and heels in which she could hardly walk and the raw power of her voice.

:cool:

But sadly she'd never be quite that good again. They did, you see, rather quickly make her over.

:(

Did you ever post on either of the Classicrockforums or CRF2? I posted on those as Foxhound for many years and so did a certain dastardly flea bitten feline calling himself Hepcat.

:confused:

And just because:

Do Wah Diddy Diddy - Paul Jones

:cool:

Sorry no, I had actually never heard of those forums till you mentioned them. And the odds are good (outside this board) my screen name would be Sabrgeek.

Or Grim Reaper.

Never used that. And it's been a while since I had the sad task of posting one of those.

Rich

That's wild... She is so young there. What a voice!

I was recently watching a mid-1960s episode of the Ed Sullivan Show, and caught this performance from the same magical era...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mczuM105fLk

Even though Petula performed her bigger hit (Downtown) earlier in the show, this is the one that stuck with me, as it's catchy as hell. :cool:

Petula is over 90 and still active (or was very recently). Here is a more obscure song she also did on the Ed Sullivan show but it's really a catchy song albeit not as famous as the two already discussed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDO7HPqPwSg

Petula Clark was fabulous! Here's my favourite:

Kiss Me Goodbye - Petula Clark

:cool:

Don't Sleep in the Subway, Darlin'