Fucking kids - Nubblies.net Forums

Elegy · 04-12-2004, 03:34 AM

auction site mix up

This proves once and for all, children are not computer savvy. Or good with money. Or worth having.

Niger Angelus · 04-12-2004, 09:54 AM

I'm
stoned

benegesseritwitch · 04-18-2004, 09:23 PM

I would say I hate kids, but I'm probably classified as one. But then again, I hate myself so it all works out.

Ugly Bastard · 04-18-2004, 10:23 PM

I hope I'm not alone when I say that these worthless threads by Elegy do get old.

-Ugly Bastard

Lethal · 04-19-2004, 05:05 PM

I would have made the damn kid pay up. I certainly wouldn't axe the deal.

Orgazmo · 04-19-2004, 05:15 PM

I don't see why the parent got so worried in the first place. Worse case scenario: the seller is an asshole and you end up with a -1 in your feedback. Not like they're really going to have to pay what the dumbass kid bid.

04-19-2004, 06:21 PM

Well techically, upon accepting the bid, the seller could hold the bidder to a legally binding contract. It's not quite as simple as feedback.

Orgazmo · 04-19-2004, 06:42 PM

I've never heard of anything like that being enforced...at all. Ebay's policy claims that they'll give you a warning on the first non-payment. On the second non-payment? You'll get another warning. On the third? You'll be banned. Simple enough.

In other news, how the fuck did the bid get up to 750,000 pounds in the first place? For that to happen, it means that someone else bid 749,999 pounds...

Also, if you look at the pictures on the news page, the monitor in the first picture isn't on the same page as the screenshot later on. If you look at the dollar figure in the first picture, it's quite a bit shorter than 750,000.

Combine this with this link, a link to the actual auction, and we'll see that, although the article did report the correct actual ending price, it said it was sold to different bidder..which is absolute bullshit. Along with this, a look at the bid history shows us that there weren't any retracted bids of 750,000 pounds.

I'm calling shenanigans on the entire article.

04-12-2004, 09:54 AM	#2 (permalink)
Niger Angelus We still believe. Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 4,697 Internets: 216	I'm stoned
	I enjoy knives and fire.

04-19-2004, 06:21 PM	#7 (permalink)
DJ FC Guest Posts: n/a	Well techically, upon accepting the bid, the seller could hold the bidder to a legally binding contract. It's not quite as simple as feedback.
DJ FC Guest Posts: n/a

04-12-2004, 03:34 AM	#1 (permalink)
Elegy Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington Posts: 197 Internets: 10	auction site mix up This proves once and for all, children are not computer savvy. Or good with money. Or worth having.

04-18-2004, 09:23 PM	#3 (permalink)
benegesseritwitch Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Duluth, Minnesota, USA Posts: 47 Internets: 10	I would say I hate kids, but I'm probably classified as one. But then again, I hate myself so it all works out.

04-18-2004, 10:23 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	I hope I'm not alone when I say that these worthless threads by Elegy do get old. -Ugly Bastard

04-19-2004, 05:05 PM	#5 (permalink)
Lethal Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Warsaw Posts: 491 Internets: 10	I would have made the damn kid pay up. I certainly wouldn't axe the deal.

04-19-2004, 05:15 PM	#6 (permalink)
Orgazmo COME ON YOU YANKS Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 15,697 Internets: 305662	I don't see why the parent got so worried in the first place. Worse case scenario: the seller is an asshole and you end up with a -1 in your feedback. Not like they're really going to have to pay what the dumbass kid bid.

04-19-2004, 06:42 PM	#8 (permalink)
Orgazmo COME ON YOU YANKS Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Indiana Posts: 15,697 Internets: 305662	I've never heard of anything like that being enforced...at all. Ebay's policy claims that they'll give you a warning on the first non-payment. On the second non-payment? You'll get another warning. On the third? You'll be banned. Simple enough. In other news, how the fuck did the bid get up to 750,000 pounds in the first place? For that to happen, it means that someone else bid 749,999 pounds... Also, if you look at the pictures on the news page, the monitor in the first picture isn't on the same page as the screenshot later on. If you look at the dollar figure in the first picture, it's quite a bit shorter than 750,000. Combine this with this link, a link to the actual auction, and we'll see that, although the article did report the correct actual ending price, it said it was sold to different bidder..which is absolute bullshit. Along with this, a look at the bid history shows us that there weren't any retracted bids of 750,000 pounds. I'm calling shenanigans on the entire article.