Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark17
A few years ago, in a thread regarding shill bidding, we discussed this notion of fake comps (items bid up by shill bidders who don't pay,) and then the general outcry was that everyone was harmed by the false value information it put into the market.
But now the standard seems to have shifted, for some, to "No harm, no foul."
Shill (fake) bidding is bad; phantom auction items are okay. And what's weird is, only half of us see the hypocrisy.
|
The no harm no foul was not proposed (at least by me) as some general overarching standard applying universally to every possible situation, and my answer to your hypothetical made that clear. It was proposed as a reason under the unique circumstances of this case what ML did in response to a no win situation was not "fraud." Was it a bad look, of course. As Scott writes, do people here really have no ability to see nuance and complexity and are able to think and live only in terms of black and white rigid rules and standards?
So your "gotcha" is a straw man as far as I am concerned. I'm more than content to take each situation on its terms, guided by general principles but not inflexible ones.