BST etiquette am I wrong

[bigfanNY]

Originally Posted by G1911

It's always funny when it takes just 10 minutes for the proof a lie was told to appear lol.

What Lie? I said I threatened nothing. I gave my word on how I would respond. I don't issue threats.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

What Lie? I said I threatened nothing. I gave my word on how I would respond. I don't issue threats.

Saying "I will see you in court." sounds like a threat to me. It doesn't have to be physical violence to be considered a threat.

[bigfanNY]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Saying "I will see you in court." sounds like a threat to me. It doesn't have to be physical violence to be considered a threat.

I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said. I will update the thread down the road with my follow up.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said. I will update the thread down the road with my follow up.

In post #54, the seller posted a screenshot of your message to him saying what I quoted.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said. I will update the thread down the road with my follow up.

Not what you said? The messages were already posted. You said "I will see you in court. I give you my word on that". Are you alleging the messages are doctored? Looks like I had it right, you're just blatantly telling obvious lies.

[bigfanNY]

Originally Posted by G1911

Not what you said? The messages were already posted. You said "I will see you in court. I give you my word on that". Are you alleging the messages are doctored? Looks like I had it right, you're just blatantly telling obvious lies.

Your a lawyer you understand that a threat of legal action with no intent to follow up is just wrong. I gave you my word I will follow up in court. That's not a threat.

Also thank you for clarification on the fact that although
I was not the first to inquire about the card. I was the first to say I will take it.
That is the crux of our disagreement. I believe that saying " I will take it " means I am committed to buying the card. And you disagree. And claim another layer of conformation is nesacery.

[Cody77]

Do as you please, but you have absolutely no basis for legal action at all. There is no binding contract. Even if I had treated you unfairly, which I did not, the only way you have any case is if I took your money, which I didn’t, and didn’t give you the item in that exchange. Without any exchange or loss on your part, there are no legal ramifications withstanding. You simply didn’t get your way and are throwing a temper tantrum. Honestly, I’m glad you didn’t respond and didn’t get the item, which has already been shipped to the buyer, because I don’t want any connection to you at all. This entire thing is absurd and every judge in this country would laugh you out of the courtroom. I wish you luck on your hunt for another Jackson, I am for real!

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Your a lawyer you understand that a threat of legal action with no intent to follow up is just wrong. I gave you my word I will follow up in court. That's not a threat.

Also thank you for clarification on the fact that although
I was not the first to inquire about the card. I was the first to say I will take it.
That is the crux of our disagreement. I believe that saying " I will take it " means I am committed to buying the card. And you disagree. And claim another layer of conformation is nesacery.

There was another thread where it was discussed ad nauseum about whether or not just saying "I'll take it" guarantees the right to buy something. I don't think any agreement was reached there, but there were plenty of opinions saying that legally, it doesn't.

In your case, the seller was already contacting others when you said you would take it if still available. If he had already messaged others who had directly contacted him about agreeing to terms, I don't see why he would have to drop that and just accept your offer. If he were selling at a show and someone else was discussing buying a card with him and you just walked over and said "I'll take it", I would consider that rude and inappropriate. I'm not sure it's different just because this happened online.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Your a lawyer you understand that a threat of legal action with no intent to follow up is just wrong. I gave you my word I will follow up in court. That's not a threat.

Also thank you for clarification on the fact that although
I was not the first to inquire about the card. I was the first to say I will take it.
That is the crux of our disagreement. I believe that saying " I will take it " means I am committed to buying the card. And you disagree. And claim another layer of conformation is nesacery.

Quoting the wrong person? You claimed in 86 "I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said."

It is, in fact, literally what you said. "I will see you in court". The message was already shown.

Want to address your blatant lie? I don't care about who is or is not a lawyer or this other crap. I never claimed anything about layers of confirmation whatsoever in any direction.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Quoting the wrong person? You claimed in 86 "I 100% agree with you saying I will see you in court sounds like a threat. But not what I said."

It is, in fact, literally what you said. "I will see you in court". The message was already shown.

Want to address your blatant lie? I don't care about who is or is not a lawyer or this other crap. I never claimed anything about layers of confirmation whatsoever in any direction.

You should be flattered someone thinks you're a lawyer.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Your a lawyer you understand that a threat of legal action with no intent to follow up is just wrong. I gave you my word I will follow up in court. That's not a threat.

Also thank you for clarification on the fact that although
I was not the first to inquire about the card. I was the first to say I will take it.
That is the crux of our disagreement. I believe that saying " I will take it " means I am committed to buying the card. And you disagree. And claim another layer of conformation is nesacery.

So, if you do actually file in court, that would mean you were not threatening and you weren't lying.

If you don't actually file in court, you were both. I'd love to see the court filings updated to this thread. My guess is, the whole thing will be a big waste of your time. But at least it would settle the "threat" and "lying" questions.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So, if you do actually file in court, that would mean you were not threatening and you weren't lying.

If you don't actually file in court, you were both. I'd love to see the court filings updated to this thread. My guess is, the whole thing will be a big waste of your time. But at least it would settle the "threat" and "lying" questions.

My vote for best post in the thread. I will also be waiting to see court papers to settle the this.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Mark17

So, if you do actually file in court, that would mean you were not threatening and you weren't lying.

If you don't actually file in court, you were both. I'd love to see the court filings updated to this thread. My guess is, the whole thing will be a big waste of your time. But at least it would settle the "threat" and "lying" questions.

He's surely not actually doing it, but even if he did that doesn't make it not a threat. Following through on the threatened action does not mean that then retroactively there was no threat. Lots of people are threatened with things that then happen. Following through on the harm, injury or danger does not mean the threat didn't happen. This is quite a novel concept that it's not a threat if you then do the thing you are threatening to do. Even if he is so mad that he actually tries to sue this guy and gets laughed out of court before it gets anywhere, he did in fact threaten to take it to court. 'It's not a threat, it's a promise' is just some tough guy posturing bullshit from angry people.

[bigfanNY]

As I said I will update down the road.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

What Lie? I said I threatened nothing. I gave my word on how I would respond. I don't issue threats.

I'm sure you can figure out the incredibly obvious. Not a threat, because you're doing it, so it's just a promise and a promise isn't a threat. Can't wait to see the court filing of this crap

[ALBB]

The part about - " See you in court " really ??

[Cody77]

It’s fine, I’ll just refrain from selling on net54 anymore. If somehow a majority thinks that commenting on a thread “I’ll take it” somehow supercedes DM’s that I’m currently conversing with saying the same thing, just waiting until payment is made to mark sold. I messaged the comment poster, told him I already had others interested and somehow he and a majority on here still think he had a claim to it absolutely blows my mind. But if this is what is to be expected on this forum, it isn’t worth the trouble. I made a post, had people DM me without comments, hadn’t officially sold it, he commented and I messaged to let him know that others were interested, was confirming his interest and payment plan if a sale was to be made and if he was ok with all of it. Somehow, his 6 hour lapse of response to me telling him others were already involved before his comment still has people on here saying he had a right to it. Then one of those interested before him agreed and paid, and I mark the item sold, then he responds 4 hours after I marked sold in my messages asking for payment info and I inform him the item sold to one of those interested parties I mentioned in my original message to him, he becomes angry, throws a tantrum, and I politely ask him to stop messaging me and have to block him. Then he starts a forum post to drag my name for him not getting his way. Childish behavior. I took initiative, messaged him after his comment to let him know that he was not the first to want the item, but I hadn’t marked sold until I got payment and somehow I’m still in the wrong for most of the comments. Literally have been buying and selling for years and never experienced anything like this. Good luck to all those who try to do right through active communication! Doesn’t seem to be the norm here. Apparently making a comment on a post makes you queue to the head of the line over those who privately message and for some reason the seller should stop all communication with anyone who failed to comment on the post and wait for however long it takes for the commenter to actually respond to a message. And by the sound of it, could and should wait days before moving forward with other “actively engaging” interested parties.