Should Some Interference Be Allowed In The BST Areas?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Slippery slope-- I'd leave it as is except for mis-identified and unauthentic cards.

A reference to comps is just a guide, not an assurance that all sales were thoroughly investigated and are given. So long as the information is reasonably accurate and not a flat-out misrepresentation, let it be, as Paul McCartney might say.

On a barely related subject, my rant would be toward those who fail/refuse to put WTB on their subject lines. Many times I have clicked on a thread thinking it might be something I would consider owning, only to see there's nothing for sale and just a solicitation for someone to please sell to the poster. I must confess there have been times I thought about "interfering" with those threads by posting a thank you for wasting my time (well, maybe not thank you, but something to drive the point home).

I have clicked on several listing also to only find out they are looking for the same card(s) as I am. Also adding the end date to auctions in the title should be a rule.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I have clicked on several listing also to only find out they are looking for the same card(s) as I am. Also adding the end date to auctions in the title should be a rule.

Yes to the bold part for sure! Also, I'd love to see a rule/guideline that posting a new comment on your own BST thread only to say that an item is sold or NLA is not allowed, as this only pushes active listings down the page.

[darwinbulldog]

I'd say it comes down to the factual accuracy in the OP. If they're posting prices of some comps, well that's sort of what I assume many people with something to sell will do. If they're just saying, "Look, here are some similar cards and what they sold for," they've done nothing wrong. Maybe those are the five most recent sales, or maybe they're the five most recent sales on eBay, or maybe they're the five highest prices of the ten most recent sales. In any case, they aren't anything other than what the seller presented them as. If they claim these are the most recent sales but have omitted one (or more), whether by accident or to deceive, then I think it's good for someone else to post the missing data. Otherwise, that's not called for.

Which is to say I'm fine with sellers as long as they're posting the truth and nothing but the truth. It need not be the whole truth, however one might define that. And I don't think it's good for the spirit of the forum if people are posting additional information detrimental to a seller who didn't post anything incorrect to begin with.