ebay finds that PWCC engaged in shill bidding?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Not my rules

If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I intend to follow the rules. I've already spoken with Leon about this privately via PM. He told me that the purpose of the "post your name" rule is so that people cannot hide behind a keyboard, anonymously disparaging specific companies or individuals without their name being tied to it or to prevent company shills from posting anonymously.

If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I intend to follow the rules. I've already spoken with Leon about this privately via PM. He told me that the purpose of the "post your name" rule is so that people cannot hide behind a keyboard, anonymously disparaging specific companies or individuals without their name being tied to it or to prevent company shills from posting anonymously.



If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

Seem to know an awful lot, about an awful lot.

Different rules for different fools I guess. This is news to me

Just sayin'

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Seem to know an awful lot, about an awful lot.

I know a fair amount about a handful of topics. Beyond that, I think you'll find that I'm rather ignorant.

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Different rules for different fools I guess. This is news to me

Just sayin'

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I don't have any reason to believe the rules are any different for me than they would be for anyone else. Perhaps Leon could clarify them if needed? But I've specifically spoken to him in private about this topic as I wanted to avoid pushing the envelope after having violated the rule in a thread I previously started regarding shill bidding. My understanding is that as long as we're not disparaging specific individuals or companies, or casting accusations at them, then we are free to discuss these topics without sharing our personal info.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I intend to follow the rules. I've already spoken with Leon about this privately via PM. He told me that the purpose of the "post your name" rule is so that people cannot hide behind a keyboard, anonymously disparaging specific companies or individuals without their name being tied to it or to prevent company shills from posting anonymously.

If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

Interesting that you would rather not give your name than continue to contribute.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Well, it's up to Leon, but in this day and age of social media and searches I can understand why some people wouldn't want their employer to know what they were doing in their out of work lives. That said, I think it's easily prevented by disguising your name with extra punctuation or using symbols to replace a letter or two etc.

I see less reason not to want the people here to know who you are.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The single DeLorme screenshot I agree can be explained, but I knew DeLorme and you presumably didn't and I can tell you from what he told and showed me that lots of stuff was going on with Brent's knowledge. If you're defending Brent you're barking up the wrong tree, IMO. And don't even get me started about his knowledge of selling whacked cards, or stuff he did himself.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The single DeLorme screenshot I agree can be explained, but I knew DeLorme and you presumably didn't and I can tell you from what he told and showed me that lots of stuff was going on with Brent's knowledge. If you're defending Brent you're barking up the wrong tree, IMO. And don't even get me started about his knowledge of selling whacked cards, or stuff he did himself.

No, I did not know DeLorme. Nor do I know Brent. I am not well connected in this hobby. I accept that there are all sorts of shenanigans going on that I know little to nothing about. Usually, where there's smoke, there's fire. But I've also encountered what comes across to me as a whole lot of fog that people in this hobby seem to want to call smoke for some reason. It just seems to build and build and the next thing you know, there's this avalanche being built from logical fallacies and rampant speculation. This is the stuff I keep finding myself combatting. It's the conclusions that people draw from the "evidence" that I struggle with.

This screenshot topic is a prime example. It keeps getting passed around as though it were evidence of PWCC instructing their buyers to shill bid on their auctions. This doesn't appear to be true though.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

No, I did not know DeLorme. Nor do I know Brent. I am not well connected in this hobby. I accept that there are all sorts of shenanigans going on that I know little to nothing about. Usually, where there's smoke, there's fire. But I've also encountered what comes across to me as a whole lot of fog that people in this hobby seem to want to call smoke for some reason. It just seems to build and build and the next thing you know, there's this avalanche being built from logical fallacies and rampant speculation. This is the stuff I keep finding myself combatting. It's the conclusions that people draw from the "evidence" that I struggle with.

This screenshot topic is a prime example. It keeps getting passed around as though it were evidence of PWCC instructing their buyers to shill bid on their auctions. This doesn't appear to be true though.

Well when I post something and include an implicit or explicit conclusion, I can't at the same time post or cross-link 20 years' worth of knowledge that supports what I am saying, can I? A lot of other people who post have lots of context behind them too. What you're doing may make sense in some cases but not in others. Every post can't be freestanding. Most readers are regulars and have the context too.

[japhi]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This screenshot topic is a prime example. It keeps getting passed around as though it were evidence of PWCC instructing their buyers to shill bid on their auctions. This doesn't appear to be true though.

In the screenshot he basically demands the guy places the high bid. And they reference previous discussions they have had around bid increments.

Not evidence of shill bidding, but does raise a number of questions. First, why is an auction house discussing bidding strategy with a potential buyer? If the bidder is a problem, block his access. This is simple stuff. And how does Brent know the high bid will get beat?

Lots to unpack in that exchange and none of it screams integrity from either side.

[japhi]

For the folks that say they simply pay the price they are comfortable with, and therefore can't be had by a shill bidder....I'm curious to understand where that pricing decision comes from? Do you folks have some magical trading card evaluation logic? Or do you use previous sales history? If the latter, you are absolutely exposed to all these bidding schemes.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by conor912

Interesting that you would rather not give your name than continue to contribute.

Leon knows who I am. He has my name and phone number. I have nothing to hide. But that is different from wanting to post content on a public forum with my personal info attached to it in the year 2021. A lot has changed over the past 10 years with respect to people posting online. Most employers in Silicon Valley these days do not want their employees to engage in public discussions under their own names, as any random comment taken out of context today can, and often does, get brought back to HR departments by people trying to "dox" someone or get them "canceled".

I have no intention of disparaging individuals or companies here, or of saying anything stupid that might get me "canceled" for something. I care more about my career than I do about launching accusations at others. I do enjoy discussing current events and developments in the hobby like this eBay/PWCC email today, but if you go back and read my comments on this topic, I don't think you'll see me accusing any of the parties involved of anything untoward. If anything, I'm pushing back against those who are.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You're obviously highly knowledgeable about computers and technology. If you substitute @, $, and 1 for a, s, and i, is it still going to show up on any search engine?

[irv]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Leon knows who I am. He has my name and phone number. I have nothing to hide. But that is different from wanting to post content on a public forum with my personal info attached to it in the year 2021. A lot has changed over the past 10 years with respect to people posting online. Most employers in Silicon Valley these days do not want their employees to engage in public discussions under their own names, as any random comment taken out of context today can, and often does, get brought back to HR departments by people trying to "dox" someone or get them "canceled".

I have no intention of disparaging individuals or companies here, or of saying anything stupid that might get me "canceled" for something. I care more about my career than I do about launching accusations at others. I do enjoy discussing current events and developments in the hobby like this eBay/PWCC email today, but if you go back and read my comments on this topic, I don't think you'll see me accusing any of the parties involved of anything untoward. If anything, I'm pushing back against those who are.

Carry on and don't worry what others think about you for not having your name out there.
In their frustration for not knowing who you are or wondering if they do, they are simply trying to coerce you into revealing it.

Like you have clearly stated, you have broken no rules in that requirement so there is no need.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Leon knows who I am. He has my name and phone number. I have nothing to hide. But that is different from wanting to post content on a public forum with my personal info attached to it in the year 2021. A lot has changed over the past 10 years with respect to people posting online. Most employers in Silicon Valley these days do not want their employees to engage in public discussions under their own names, as any random comment taken out of context today can, and often does, get brought back to HR departments by people trying to "dox" someone or get them "canceled".

I have no intention of disparaging individuals or companies here, or of saying anything stupid that might get me "canceled" for something. I care more about my career than I do about launching accusations at others. I do enjoy discussing current events and developments in the hobby like this eBay/PWCC email today, but if you go back and read my comments on this topic, I don't think you'll see me accusing any of the parties involved of anything untoward. If anything, I'm pushing back against those who are.

Well, if you're not going to post your name, then I will - how does that sound? His name, ladies and gentlemen, is ... JACK FROST. Here is his recent picture:

[BengoughingForAwhile]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Well, if you're not going to post your name, then I will - how does that sound? His name, ladies and gentlemen, is ... JACK FROST. Here is his recent picture:

Huh. I was thinking his name was Parson Brown.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Well, if you're not going to post your name, then I will - how does that sound? His name, ladies and gentlemen, is ... JACK FROST. Here is his recent picture:

Based on his history, I thought his name was was Bo Hunter... not to be confused with Bo Jackson or Hunter Pence.

I suppose that only those who frequent BO (meaning Blowout- not just another Bo) will get the reference.

[chadeast]

the one and only Snowman

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Based on his history, I thought his name was was Bo Hunter... not to be confused with Bo Jackson or Hunter Pence.

I suppose that only those who frequent BO (meaning Blowout- not just another Bo) will get the reference.

Yes that was his Blowout ID. Not his real name though.

[samosa4u]

Back to PWCC ...

Here is the way I see it: eBay is the largest marketplace for sports cards, right? And majority of the insane prices would come from PWCC - shilling or no shilling. And of course, this set off a chain reaction of increased prices. Now, with PWCC being gone, I want to see what will happen to card prices on eBay over the next couple of years.

[Leon]

You have easily crossed the line a bit. I told you that one post could stay. I didn't give you carte blanche to not follow the rules. To continue saying who you know and what you know and anything else, is going to require your name. Nothing personal.
I just went back and read the PM. I did say you could call out absolute fraud as you did in that one thread, without having your name...as it was such a good job. But in retrospect no exceptions should probably be made. I do like people who root out fraud in the hobby. Quite the conundrum.

Originally Posted by Snowman

I intend to follow the rules. I've already spoken with Leon about this privately via PM. He told me that the purpose of the "post your name" rule is so that people cannot hide behind a keyboard, anonymously disparaging specific companies or individuals without their name being tied to it or to prevent company shills from posting anonymously.

If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Leon

You have easily crossed the line a bit. I told you that one post could stay. I didn't give you carte blanche to not follow the rules. To continue saying who you know and what you know and anything else, is going to require your name. Nothing personal.
I just went back and read the PM. I did say you could call out absolute fraud as you did in that one thread, without having your name...as it was such a good job. But in retrospect no exceptions should probably be made. I do like people who root out fraud in the hobby. Quite the conundrum.



.

Thank you for the clarification. I must have misunderstood our prior conversation. I was under the impression that as long as I wasn't disparaging someone or some company that it was acceptable to engage in conversations like this. I will have to excuse myself from the discussion then. My apologies.

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I intend to follow the rules. I've already spoken with Leon about this privately via PM. He told me that the purpose of the "post your name" rule is so that people cannot hide behind a keyboard, anonymously disparaging specific companies or individuals without their name being tied to it or to prevent company shills from posting anonymously.

If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

"I don't buy for a second that this is eBay's attempt at cracking down on shill bidding. That's bullshit. If eBay wanted to crack down on this, they would have done so a long time ago, and they would have done it from the inside. They are the ones with all of the relevant bidding behavior and user data. Not the sellers. They can easily crack down on shill bidding, but they've chosen not to, likely because it's a project that would take money out of their pockets."

A quote from you. This is offering an opinion and/or disparaging them.

I could not care less whether you offer an opinion or not. However, when you do you must abide by the rules.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah, there is just no way iMO you're going to get heavily involved in scandal discussions without a name out there. If you want to be anonymous stick to discussing T206 backs or whatever. The most knowledgeable guys in the world on topics like that are here.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Snowman

If he feels that my discussion on this topic is in violation of that, then I will stop contributing to these conversations. But I'm not disparaging anyone or any company in this discussion.

Awfully peculiar In my opinion. Im not sure your threat of not contributing outweighs putting a name with your post, at least with the admins that be.