"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

by jbonie Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:38 pm

Interesting what is going on across the street - auction houses are given the choice to enable their software in order to see max bids. This makes shill bidding entirely possible, either by the auction house, or by a “collector” whom the auction house has asked to place the shill bids on their behalf in order to appear non-liable.

Posters then have suggested that shill bidding is the fault of the bidder for trusting a certain auction house. This is completely backwards logic that blames the victim for the crime. It’s like telling a victim of date rape that she shouldn’t have gone out with the guy in the first place. But it is the rapist who is the criminal.

A moderator over there has deemed a person whom he believes has asked too many questions a “troublemaker”. That’s a dangerous precedent to set. The mod even suggested that if this person were to call the auction houses and ask whether they have opted into viewing max bids, then that person ought to be banned from bidding.

The message is clear. Ask too many questions, cause any sort of disruption, and you will be ostracized from the community. I got banned from that message board just for expressing my opinion, although I doubt the post violated any forum rules. You have to wonder what people’s motives are that they would want to silence people.

"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?" Photo_10

by sabrjay Sat Jun 28, 2014 11:32 pm

The difference between this board and the one across the street is that we DO NOT accept ads and rely on that revenue as income. It is in their best interest to quell problems that will hurt their bottom. The only time they step up is when the outrage towards an advertiser/auction house is so overwhelming that they can no longer ignore it. MastroNet is a shining example.

You can rest assured that on this board, the only way you will get banned is if someone continues with poor behaviour after we've asked them to stop. This forum is almost 7 years old and in that time Ben and I have only banned two people that were not spammers.

by jbonie Sun Jun 29, 2014 12:19 am

Leon owns an auction house, and his auction house, which he claims does not shill bid, is at a competitive disadvantage to the ones who might shill bid. I do believe that his auction house doesn't shill, but then why would he support that auction houses can choose whether they see max bids?

You can't say that is a matter of choice or freedom whether auction houses can view max bids. The only thing that information can possibly be used for is to commit crimes. No one has the freedom to commit a crime, so it's not a matter of prerogative or the rights of auction houses.

I would also like to know where those pesky lawyers disappeared to - they were so busy fighting fraud on ebay, so you would think they would be outraged to find that auction houses can choose whether they view bidders' max bids. Perhaps they're out hanging in a back alley somewhere.

by jbonie Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:16 am

P.S., did you see the thread where there is the poll? Wonkaticket, who spends a considerable amount of money in the hobby, finds out that he was potentially the victim of systemic fraud. But he doesn't seem too concerned, does he? It's the bidder's responsibility to not be shill bid, as opposed to the responsibility of the person doing the shilling? So is he saying that it is his own fault when he gets shill bid upon?

So then Leon asks a guy if he is "ok medically" because the guy has expressed that he feels that the software program is invasive. Is that a theme, because it seems that everyone who speaks up about the inconsistencies and contradictions of this hobby, its wrongdoings, gets accused of being crazy. Has anyone ever thought that maybe those people aren't actually crazy after all?

Point being, Net54 is a great place to go if you want to get brainwashed.

by sabrjay Sun Jun 29, 2014 10:32 pm

I don't read anything across the street unless someone emails me about something that might be of interest to me. I really don't miss the politics and BS over there.

It's sad that people are of the mentality that it is the victim's fault for getting shilled. Your rape analogy is a good one. Sadly, there are people that even if they get shilled, don't care because they have in mind how much they will spend on an item and if it comes in under that, even if they are shilled, then they are happy.

We have a great little community here and I love. As pointed out, your allowed to speak your mind here, within reason. We just frown upon personal attacks unless you have proof to back up what you are saying and use your real name.

by jbonie Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:06 am

sabrjay wrote:
We have a great little community here and I love. As pointed out, your allowed to speak your mind here, within reason. We just frown upon personal attacks unless you have proof to back up what you are saying and use your real name.

Jay, I agree with everything that you're saying, I just don't think that I've made personal attacks. I haven't attacked anyone's character in this thread, I'm just asking why people have written what they have and pointing out contradictions.

In fact, the mod of Net54 made personal attacks, asking someone if he was "ok medically?" and telling someone else he was "talking out of his ass" and a "hacker-wannabe", although it's against his own forum rules. It's not the first time, either.

by seablaster Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:22 am

If you had gone with duct tape instead of painter's tape for the picture Jamie, then you would have had me convinced.

Very Happy

by jbonie Mon Jun 30, 2014 1:52 am

seablaster wrote:If you had gone with duct tape instead of painter's tape for the picture Jamie, then you would have had me convinced.

LOL, I just grabbed whatever was in the closet! Duct tape was the original idea and might have had a better effect.

by jbonie Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:14 am

Geez, it's been two days, and that's all the responses that I get? Look, being a protester isn't easy - what do I have to do, light myself on fire?!?

lol!

by sabrjay Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:27 am

Jamie, I'm not saying you made a personal attack. I was pointing out what the rules of the forum are for those that may not be familiar with them. If cross the line, I will definitely let you know ninja

by jbonie Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:30 am

Okay, thanks Jay. Cool

by ullmandds Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:06 am

I am tired of trying to fight the corruption in the hobby... The best way to not get burned is to not participate. My want list is very thin so for the most part I am sitting on the sidelines watching.

Jamie... Your hair is looking a little Andy kaufmanesque!

by jbonie Wed Jul 02, 2014 2:25 am

ullmandds wrote:I am tired of trying to fight the corruption in the hobby... The best way to not get burned is to not participate. My want list is very thin so for the most part I am sitting on the sidelines watching.

Yeah, I actually haven't even placed a single bid this year.

ullmandds wrote:Jamie... Your hair is looking a little Andy kaufmanesque!

It beats getting taken seriously, Pete!

by wonkaticket Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:01 pm

Jamie, please don’t come across the street and put words in my mouth. I never said anything in that thread other than “it’s on the bidder to decide who he or she does business with and who they trust” because quite simply that’s all anyone can do. I never did condone shill bidding or make excuses for those who practice that trade etc.

Let’s also be transparent with the folks here as to why most likely you are on about me out of the blue and decided to wrap me into your craziness over here.

You recently contacted me about selling one of your OJ’s the “Whitney & Dog” card as I was most likely the under bidder at the time you bought the card. I said yes I would be interested, what did you have in mind. You then sent back an email asking me to buy 4 cards for 25k not the one card asked about and that this offer is non-negotiable. I politely declined and said I would not be into that many cards at the offered price at this time. I would understand if I saw them at auction and missed out etc. but would take my chances thanks for thinking of me. Only later to start receiving snarky emails about your cards being too rich for my blood. Along with a good solid helping of your conspiracy theories, so called death threats from the mob & FBI. I then asked you not to contact me in the future.

Perhaps Jamie you should be more concerned with your own welfare and mental health and not concerned with how I choose to do business when it comes to collecting.

As to shill bidding do I think it happens…sure. Is it set up against many of the buyers perhaps. What can be done I’m not sure? Other than stop collecting which I choose not do at this time so my only option is to roll the dice and do business with folks I think are on the up and up.

Cheers,

John

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:28 am

wonkaticket wrote:Jamie, please don’t come across the street and put words in my mouth. I never said anything in that thread other than “it’s on the bidder to decide who he or she does business with and who they trust” because quite simply that’s all anyone can do. I never did condone shill bidding or make excuses for those who practice that trade etc.

John,

That thread consisted of a poll of whether simpleauction ought to remove the option to see the max bid, in the very same post which you quoted, you put a "+1" by the quote that, "It's their job to develop the software and provide the various [options]. It's the auction house's responsibility to decide which software they want to implement."

Since you agreed with the post that it's simpleauctions' job to provide that option to auction houses, then clearly you are not objecting to their practice. As a large-scale buyer in the hobby, why would you support this? It was undisclosed which auction houses had taken the option, so wouldn't it have been a violation of your own consumer rights?

Jamie

by wonkaticket Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:33 am

Jamie, if you look I never voted in the poll. I simply agreed with Barry Sloate that it's the software developers job to create a software and it's options. How that software is used I do feel is on the people that use the software. I think it falls on them to disclose.....it's not the software developers fault if features are misused.

While I can't get into the mindset of why that feature would be used etc. I can say that tons of programs are made and sold daily and many times the features of those programs are used for not so savory reasons.

I can't be concerned about if the sky is falling I can only choose to do business with folks I trust and only leave high bids with those I trust.

Many of the folks I bid with BTW don't even have software. Do you know how many auction sites still just use the call in method for your proxy bid? Quite a few for the record....what's to stop them from telling me there was a floor bidder that drove me close or too my max....they know ahead of time what I was willing to spend.

As for being a "large scale" buyer not sure I'm that at all. Even if I was my thoughts would not carry any more weight than a guy who spends $100 a year IMO. I don't support getting screwed but I've also sort of sadly accepted I have to be cautious where I can be. I guess we are all marks at the end of the day.

The more public you are about your collecting the bigger the mark you may become also. What can be done Jamie? It boils down to excepting you don't have a ton of control and your going to put yourself at risk and hope you're doing business with honest folks. Or just hang up your bidding paddle and call it a day.

John

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:01 am

John,

You can't control which card is consigned to which auction house. Don't sometimes cards come up that you need or want to buy that happen to be auctioned by a house that you don't trust? Wouldn't it be to every collector's advantage if we all had the peace of mind to know that the software was programmed to prevent shill bidding?

Jamie

by wonkaticket Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:28 am

jbonie wrote:John,

You can't control which card is consigned to which auction house. Don't sometimes cards come up that you need or want to buy that happen to be auctioned by a house that you don't trust? Wouldn't it be to every collector's advantage if we all had the peace of mind to know that the software was programmed to prevent shill bidding?

Jamie

Or the other simple option if an item comes up with someone I have that much of to disdain for...just don't bid or give them the business.

Personally I don't need a software to make the world a better place if I feel that strong about someone I don't care what software they use they won't get my business. Cleaning the hobby up is deeper and much more complex than some software.

John

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:34 am

What about for set collectors who need a certain card and have no real choice except to bid? Don't you collect t206 rare backs yourself? It would certainly be to your advantage if you could bid anywhere without concern, wouldn't it? Wouldn't it be better for every collector in the entire hobby if they didn't have to worry about shill bidding?

by wonkaticket Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:02 am

jbonie wrote:What about for set collectors who need a certain card and have no real choice except to bid? Don't you collect t206 rare backs yourself? It would certainly be to your advantage if you could bid anywhere without concern, wouldn't it? Wouldn't it be better for every collector in the entire hobby if they didn't have to worry about shill bidding?

Jamie I’m tired of talking in circles with you on this there is no gotcha moment here for you with me.

There are for the most part two types of people who make up the bulk of these heated threads about crooks and cheats. Type one folks who in fact don’t even bid or do little to no business with the folks they slam publicly. Type two those who rally and cry the blues yet greet the same folks with smiles and wallets open for their precious items all while condemning from cyberspace.

I have said no to folks and let items pass, and I’ve also danced with the devil on occasion skin tingling to obtain an item. Part of the hobby or life for that matter. However for the most part I try not to do business with folks I don’t trust. If you or anyone else wants to clean up the hobby it’s very simple. Close your wallets and don’t do business with folks you don’t trust or that you know to be a major part of the hobby mess.

No software is going to create a utopia. Heck very few people in the auction world use Simple Auction software anyways as I have said prior. There will be no government agency that will enforce all auction houses conform to an approved software either…never going to happen.

For the most part these dealers are only part of the problem the collectors myself included are as much to blame. Because many of us are like the customer in the below video like it or not….and because of this trait, rest assured if these guys want to find a way to screw you it will be found software changes or not.

Not much else I can say Jaime...I guess there is another option. You yourself make a software market that software make it the industry standard, begin to spearhead hobby reform etc. But that isn't done from a chat room on a Tuesday night.

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:19 am

wonkaticket wrote:
Heck very few people in the auction world use Simple Auction software anyways as I have said prior.

Off the top of my head, I can think of LOTG, Mile High, Sterling, SCP, Goodwin, Legendary, B-L Auctions... I'm sure there's more, too.

wonkaticket wrote:For the most part these dealers are only part of the problem the collectors myself included are as much to blame.

Ah yes, here we go again, blame the victim for the crime. Very nice.

by wonkaticket Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:40 am

wonkaticket wrote:
wonkaticket wrote:For the most part these dealers are only part of the problem the collectors myself included are as much to blame.

Ah yes, here we go again, blame the victim for the crime. Very nice.

Better to take some responsibility for being a part of the problem. Versus ranting in cyberspace about conspiracy theories, mental delusions of mob hits etc. All while asking hard hitting questions like why don’t utopias exist and wouldn’t it be nice if they did? Why I even tried to have a rational conversation with someone who is so clearly not rational is beyond me. Have a good night Jamie.

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:08 am

wonkaticket wrote:Why I even tried to have a rational conversation with someone who is so clearly not rational is beyond me.

If your idea of rationality is to be permissive of systemic fraud, then who agrees with you other than criminals?

Mr. Wonka, here is some eye candy for you:

"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?" WhitneyDogSGC70_zpsc953ee27

"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?" WhitneyDogSGC70_zpsc953ee27

The dog is not impressed with your nihilistic drivel.

by ullmandds Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:02 pm

ha ha...lots of truth to that video clip!

by jbonie Wed Jul 09, 2014 5:42 pm

ullmandds wrote:ha ha...lots of truth to that video clip!

by Sponsored content

"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

"Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"

Re: "Would You Like Some Fraud With That?"