pwcc (part two)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

i am aware. i have bought and sold stock so i get the notifications. your a lawyer so you are trying to jerk my words to prove a point about me not knowing how it works. its 12:00pm on a work night. had i known that you would use every exact word against me i would have worded it slightly more perfect for you.

my original comments still stand. you are a lawyer, with the facilities to do it, and you are on here talking about it day in and day out? am i the only one that doesn't make sense to?

kevin

As I have said, I have discussed these issues with law enforcement. I can't just go out and file a lawsuit, I need a client, a defendant, and a claim, no? Some of these matters are not all that conducive to civil class actions, in my estimation.

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I have said, I have discussed these issues with law enforcement. I can't just go out and file a lawsuit, I need a client, a defendant, and a claim, no? Some of these matters are not all that conducive to civil class actions, in my estimation.

that shouldn't be hard with how rampant the problem is right? your talking about all of the things you need every day? are you saying that the items you need are not existant? then what in the world are you talking about on here?

you basically just admitted you have nothing solid.

kevin

[RGold]

I'm starting to lose any respect I had for Harvard Law. Kevin is beating you up like a church mouse.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rgold

i'm starting to lose any respect i had for harvard law. Kevin is beating you up like a church mouse. :d:d:d

lol.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

that shouldn't be hard with how rampant the problem is right? your talking about all of the things you need every day? are you saying that the items you need are not existant? then what in the world are you talking about on here?

you basically just admitted you have nothing solid.

kevin

You just keep revealing your ignorance. There are all sorts of meritorious individual claims that do not work as class actions because of very precise and technical requirements you obviously don't know anything about. But keep it up, you are impressing my friend Ron.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Keith not taken as confrontational at all. I think the answer in terms of a fraud claim, like in most circumstances, depends on the facts of your case, what information do you have based on bid history, etc. suggesting you have been defrauded. Fraud has to be proven by clear and convincing evidence, and alleged with particularity. This is why civil lawsuits are imperfect, as someone alluded to. It can be a catch 22 -- the evidence is in the hands of the fraudster, but without it you don't have enough to state a claim that isn't speculative. Now if Mastro's bidding records are released, for example, and it's pretty clear you were run up on a particular card -- different story.

As far as a claim against anyone for inflating the overall market, it would seem very difficult to prove that any particular card you may have bought was overpriced for that reason, as there could be a host of explanations. Then again, I tend to think like a defense lawyer, so don't take my word for it.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Kevin,

You should stay away from things like this...

[Leon]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Kevin,

You should stay away from things like this...

Yeah, but I was sitting on the couch watching the debacle and literally laughing out loud. I had to tell my wife what was going on. Hilarious. There is a fool born on this board every day. I can't imagine arguing a subject I barely know anything about with someone that does it, and has been doing it for decades, for a living.

[Gradedcardman]

12 pm is a work night ?

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by Leon

Yeah, but I was sitting on the couch watching the debacle and literally laughing out loud. I had to tell my wife what was going on. Hilarious. There is a fool born on this board every day. I can't imagine arguing a subject I barely know anything about with someone that does it, and has been doing it for decades, for a living.

I blame Wikipedia.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Kevin,

Thanks for getting me to laugh out loud in a very quiet coffee shop. I was laughing at the picture, not at the post - that was great.

[RCMcKenzie]

It would not surprise me in the least to learn that everything you need to know about lawyering is contained within that box. As a famous lawyer once said, "It depends upon what the definition of 'is' is."

[ALR-bishop]

Lawyers do not think lawyer jokes are funny, and non lawyers do not think they are jokes.

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by slipk1068

+1

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Keith not taken as confrontational at all. I think the answer in terms of a fraud claim, like in most circumstances, depends on the facts of your case, what information do you have based on bid history, etc. suggesting you have been defrauded. Fraud has to be proven by clear and convincing evidence, and alleged with particularity. This is why civil lawsuits are imperfect, as someone alluded to. It can be a catch 22 -- the evidence is in the hands of the fraudster, but without it you don't have enough to state a claim that isn't speculative. Now if Mastro's bidding records are released, for example, and it's pretty clear you were run up on a particular card -- different story.

As far as a claim against anyone for inflating the overall market, it would seem very difficult to prove that any particular card you may have bought was overpriced for that reason, as there could be a host of explanations. Then again, I tend to think like a defense lawyer, so don't take my word for it.

Thanks for that. This is what I was concerned you might say. I feel like I walked into my garage and two cockroaches scrambled for cover, but one big bastard stood his ground and spat at me. Guess which one is ebay.

I need a shower.

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You just keep revealing your ignorance. There are all sorts of meritorious individual claims that do not work as class actions because of very precise and technical requirements you obviously don't know anything about. But keep it up, you are impressing my friend Ron.

i didn't say all of them work that way. you are injecting words into the conversation.

i never claimed to know everything, but at the same time i have not said anything unfactual. period. if you want to debate that, then lets debate that.

what specifically have i said that is not accurate?

kevin

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

i didn't say all of them work that way. you are injecting words into the conversation.

i never claimed to know everything, but at the same time i have not said anything unfactual. period. if you want to debate that, then lets debate that.

what specifically have i said that is not accurate?

kevin

If you insist.

"enough claims for a single case or series of events will get compiled into a class action suit."

WRONG

"are you telling me that if a company has a large number of civil cases for a particular series of events they would not push to have those cases settled as a class action instead of fighting them individually"

WRONG

"someone with attention to suits being filed against a particular defendant can also easily bring class action on behalf of the class. whether the defendant pushes for it, or an entity involved in a civil case brings it to a class action......with enough people filing civil suit the chances of it becoming a class action from civil suit goes up."

WRONG

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you insist.

"enough claims for a single case or series of events will get compiled into a class action suit."

WRONG

"are you telling me that if a company has a large number of civil cases for a particular series of events they would not push to have those cases settled as a class action instead of fighting them individually"

WRONG

"someone with attention to suits being filed against a particular defendant can also easily bring class action on behalf of the class. whether the defendant pushes for it, or an entity involved in a civil case brings it to a class action......with enough people filing civil suit the chances of it becoming a class action from civil suit goes up."

WRONG

i already responded to each one of those but i will do it again

1) can is the correct word instead of 'will'. you got me on a single word i guess.
2) it has happened. it can happen and under the right circumstances it is exactly what one would want to happen.
3) this is pretty obvious. the more you poke at a situation, the better chance that it gets opened up, new things get exposed an opened into something else by more people and more eyes. that is the entire point of your whole thread is it not? that is what you even hope to achieve by talking about it.

im done responding to this now. you can continue to talk amongst yourselves.

kevin

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I have said, I have discussed these issues with law enforcement. I can't just go out and file a lawsuit, I need a client, a defendant, and a claim, no? Some of these matters are not all that conducive to civil class actions, in my estimation.

Hello, Peter. I am going to stick my neck out here and ask a few questions. This whole ebay/shill/seller thing has me uncomfortable. My problem, I know. So I am asking. So feel free to shut me down if I make no sense..

I buy a card. There is bidding activity from a potential buyer that bids up the price of a card. I end up winning but only after a run up with several incremental bids. It appears there may be shilling going on. So who do I look for ? The shiller? The seller for "letting it happen"? Or is ebay accountable for not providing tools to stop this type of activity? I hated dealing with hypotheticals when I was involved in the financial industry but dont know any way to get a better idea...oh yeah, I live in California and the seller is in...pick another state...

Keith Temple

[Runscott]

Keith, Kevin, Ronald,

Would you prefer that we ignore problems we see, unless we can legally prosecute? The law isn't perfect and ebay is shielding its sellers in order to maximize profit. But despite this, we can still point out problems that we see and let our forum members react as they deem appropriate.

For instance, as a result of this discussion I might decide that Brent's actions are fine, and bid or consign with him. Or I might decide that he's a cheat who is using ebay's policies of shielding fraud, to make as much money as he can while he can. But at least we have discussed it...in a DISCUSSION FORUM... which to me seems very appropriate.

[slipk1068]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Keith, Kevin, Ronald,

Would you prefer that we ignore problems we see, unless we can legally prosecute? The law isn't perfect and ebay is shielding its sellers in order to maximize profit. But despite this, we can still point out problems that we see and let our forum members react as they deem appropriate.

For instance, as a result of this discussion I might decide that Brent's actions are fine, and bid or consign with him. Or I might decide that he's a cheat who is using ebay's policies of shielding fraud, to make as much money as he can while he can. But at least we have discussed it...in a DISCUSSION FORUM... which to me seems very appropriate.

+1

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Keith, Kevin, Ronald,

Would you prefer that we ignore problems we see, unless we can legally prosecute? The law isn't perfect and ebay is shielding its sellers in order to maximize profit. But despite this, we can still point out problems that we see and let our forum members react as they deem appropriate.

For instance, as a result of this discussion I might decide that Brent's actions are fine, and bid or consign with him. Or I might decide that he's a cheat who is using ebay's policies of shielding fraud, to make as much money as he can while he can. But at least we have discussed it...in a DISCUSSION FORUM... which to me seems very appropriate.

Scott,

The reason I asked my rather naive-looking question is because of the discussion on this thread. I am new to the hobby and am struggling with what I need to do personally about this. I have bought cards from many board members this last year and have yet to have any problem with a BST transaction, thank you all very much. I have also purchased cards from a few ebay sellers mentioned in this thread (and others), as well as a few auction houses. While my purchases are nowhere near the dollars seen in these examples, I am really wondering if I have paid inflated prices because of the condition of the marketplace.

So is the seller a cheat, or is the marketplace rigged so a guy like me won't know he's been had until...now. Be the seller an AH with a solid reputation, or an ebay site with questionable scan practices and shilling apparently all too frequent for any comfort...I am thinking about going back to building bamboo rods and forgetting all this. Too bad, as it has been a lot of fun.

My question to Mr. Spaeth was not intended as confrontational, and if taken that way, my apologies.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Keith, Kevin, Ronald,

Would you prefer that we ignore problems we see, unless we can legally prosecute? The law isn't perfect and ebay is shielding its sellers in order to maximize profit. But despite this, we can still point out problems that we see and let our forum members react as they deem appropriate.

For instance, as a result of this discussion I might decide that Brent's actions are fine, and bid or consign with him. Or I might decide that he's a cheat who is using ebay's policies of shielding fraud, to make as much money as he can while he can. But at least we have discussed it...in a DISCUSSION FORUM... which to me seems very appropriate.

Scott, the problem is that the arguments around this get too personal. People are basically calling each other idiots if they don't agree w/ the opposing opinion. There's no "I respect your opinion, and let's agree to disagree." Instead it's more like, "you are an idiot who doesn't know what the #%#$%$ you're talking about, so just shut the %$#%$# up before you embarrass yourself further."

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by glchen

Scott, the problem is that the arguments around this get too personal. People are basically calling each other idiots if they don't agree w/ the opposing opinion. There's no "I respect your opinion, and let's agree to disagree." Instead it's more like, "you are an idiot who doesn't know what the #%#$%$ you're talking about, so just shut the %$#%$# up before you embarrass yourself further."

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living respected the professional opinions of people who are dispensing information gleaned directly from decades of practice in that professional field instead of claiming that their lay opinions of said field are instead more accurate there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living didn't fabricate their opinions for reasons of greed or dishonesty in an attempt to protect the fraudsters -- and instead actually gave honest opinions -- there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Respect is a two way street.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living respected the professional opinions of people who are dispensing information gleaned directly from decades of practice in that professional field instead of claiming that their lay opinions of said field are instead more accurate there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living didn't fabricate their opinions for reasons of greed or dishonesty in an attempt to protect the fraudsters -- and instead actually gave honest opinions -- there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Respect is a two way street.

+1

[jhs5120]

On a seperate note, has anyone seen some of the bidding activity in the HYEE auction?

Do they accept consignments?

[markf31]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living respected the professional opinions of people who are dispensing information gleaned directly from decades of practice in that professional field instead of claiming that their lay opinions of said field are instead more accurate there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living didn't fabricate their opinions for reasons of greed or dishonesty in an attempt to protect the fraudsters -- and instead actually gave honest opinions -- there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Respect is a two way street.

+1

It's hard to respect someone when they spew nonsense about a topic that they, in reality, know absolutely nothing about, attempt to defend their own blatant ignorance on the subject and charade as an expert on that topic. That is being stupid and/or ignorant. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living respected the professional opinions of people who are dispensing information gleaned directly from decades of practice in that professional field instead of claiming that their lay opinions of said field are instead more accurate there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Maybe if the people who sell widgets for a living didn't fabricate their opinions for reasons of greed or dishonesty in an attempt to protect the fraudsters -- and instead actually gave honest opinions -- there wouldn't be the problem you talk about.

Respect is a two way street.

Jeff, so basically you're saying for certain topics on this board should be for lawyers-only to discuss.

Leon, can we have a lawyers-only subforum?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by glchen

Jeff, so basically you're saying for certain topics on this board should be for lawyers-only to discuss.

Leon, can we have a lawyers-only subforum?

No, Gary, what I'm saying is that when the issue arises which calls for an analysis of the law or for anecdotal information about how a practice of law occurs, the idiots with no training or education in the field (except from watching TV) should STFU and not say that we're wrong and insist upon flaunting their ignorance. It's a waste of sound information and it's only being challenged in order to protect a fraudster (or prevent someone's loved one from being raped or something).

Leon, can we have a passive-aggressive asshole subforum?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by glchen

Scott, the problem is that the arguments around this get too personal. People are basically calling each other idiots if they don't agree w/ the opposing opinion. There's no "I respect your opinion, and let's agree to disagree." Instead it's more like, "you are an idiot who doesn't know what the #%#$%$ you're talking about, so just shut the %$#%$# up before you embarrass yourself further."

Gary, you and I see eye to eye on the above. I count myself as one of the guys who has a hard time 'holding back' in such situations. I can do it easily in real life, but not so much on the internet. In that respect, many of us here are very much alike, even though we are yelling at each other.