Topic: Split: mprep's unethical violation of auction rules (Read 1411 times)

While I appreciate your attempt at resolving the situation, IMO the proposal seems unfair. Here's what I suggest:

1. I remove the feedback against you.

2. You change your feedbacks to a neutral ones.

3. You keep the neutral feedback for as long as you feel is needed.

Obviously, I can't get into your brain and tell what your intentions were when you left the negative feedback, but from the timing (left a neutral feedback, I split the thread, you left negative feedback), the Trust text ("<...>Mprep edited his auction thread (auction thread are unable to be edited for a reason) to remove my calling him out on his bullshit auction extension<...>") and your previous reception to my moderation (the 2015 situation), to me (and probably to quite a few unrelated users) it seems like you left negative feedback for my moderation (which I consider incredibly untrustworthy and scummy), not the auction extension.

I have nothing against the neutral feedback for extending the auction - if some people find such actions questionable, they will be able to easily access said information while they're investigating my Trust feedback and make their decisions as to whether it's worth conducting business with me. However, leaving negative feedback for such actions, putting me in the same bracket as someone who peddles hacked accounts, fake positive Trust feedback or has been explicitly entrusted to keep money safe yet managed to lose it (e.g. TradeFortress) seems not only excessive but heavily biased against me.

A contract was never formed as mprep never acquired a license to host an auction. What are you smoking tecshare?

Do me a favor first. 

Go create a auction thread... then edit that OP and let me know what world I'm from.

It's not a minor thing that Mprep did.

So I read through the link you provided, with facts you provided to look smart, and now I'm playing lawyer? Please Tecshare, you have to be smarter than this.

Do not refer to laws if you are not aware of the full extent of it, unless you want to make a fool of yourself.

---

You failed once again to reply to any of my questions regarding you and your sales, that's interesting.

I believe you are insane.

"License Requirements

State laws regulate auctions by providing license to bona fide dealers. Each state has discretionary powers to impose regulations in auctions for general welfare of public. Administrative officers are provided discretionary power for granting licenses to auctioneers. The officials can refuse license if the character and qualifications of a person are not satisfactory. They can refuse license if public interest requires refusal of license. The state licensing board can revoke license of persons if they do not meet the standards of honesty, truthfulness, integrity, and competence imposed]. When a licensee violates the terms of the license, the license can be revoked. If the authorities receive complaint of defrauding clients, also, license can be revoked."

Excuse you? threats? You are the one making up shit about each auction on this forum acting under some laws while you are wrong, and I asked you an honest question if you have the proper licenses to have an online store on this forum and if you pay taxes on each sale. Take that as a threat if you are, but that just goes to show that you actually are.. insane.

Read on from the part you quoted about the laws, it states further below that those laws apply for licensed auction houses. But I guess you only read what you want to?

How much tax do you pay for selling mystery boxes? If eeach auction on this forum is under the laws of USA then surely all your sales need be regulated, right? Do you have a license to operate an online store?

This is what terms and conditions are for. If you don't want this problem plan ahead and stipulate it is part of the agreement to bid, otherwise a contract is a contract. Also I just noticed you think I am BAC. That's cute.



Because your opinion that these actions are "unregulated" is nothing but a fantasy. They are very much regulated by these laws because they take place within these nations. A license for an auction house is not required.

So if something were to happen after you've opened an auction you are never, under any circumstances, allowed to change something about it? What planet are you from?

Were you personally effected by this auction being extended for 1 week? Did it cause you any losses? Why are you so invested in this, if not for a personal vendetta against mprep?

But more on topic: Please do tell me how laws for certain jurisdictions for legal auction houses with a license to run an auction have anything to do with unregulated auctions on an unregulated forum for an unregulated currency, such as Bitcoin. If you can I'll retract everything that I have stated in this thread.

Do me a favor first. 

Go create a auction thread... then edit that OP and let me know what world I'm from.

It's not a minor thing that Mprep did.

"The minimum bid is 0.02 BTC, the bids should be evenly divisible by 0.01 BTC. The auction will end on March 15th when this thread is closed if there is at least 1 valid bid. If there isn't one, it'll end 1 week after the first valid bid is placed. The winner's advertisement will run for 1 month."

An excuse after the fact isn't acceptable or honest.

If everyone extended their auction on a whim... it would cause problems on that side of the forum.

Mprep knows they were wrong and their new auctions now include some pretty lame terms in the OP.  I've reached out to Mprep because he counter my feedback with his own negative (lol).

This isn't politics.  It isn't debatable... the quotes are his quotes. He violated them + other things that are above my pay grade.

That he had issues with the previous month?

What was that reason for extending the auction in the OP?

I see no issues in extending the auction if there is valid reason for doing so (which mprep stated).

After reading up on this it would appear that you (BayAreaCoins) just have it out for mprep for whatever reason.

I see no issues in extending the auction if there is valid reason for doing so (which mprep stated).

When it comes to "Violating a contract", that's just nonsense. Perhaps that is how you want it to be, but it's not.

---

Lock this thread and toss it away again please, no need for this.