The Magic Librarities

magic-belgium wrote:

stu55 wrote:I asked for Insurance and nothing ever came of that from him

Looks like Stu says otherwise.

Then Stu55 will be able to show me the E-Mail requesting Insurance.

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:No.

Hi.
Did you offer to Stu55 to send the cards by Registrated Mail, to cover the loss in case of a problem? If you send him cards by normal way, did you mention to him that in case of problems, no refund will be possible?

Our trade was a year ago. I don't remember we had this king of talk.

yvel wrote:

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:No.

Hi.
Did you offer to Stu55 to send the cards by Registrated Mail, to cover the loss in case of a problem? If you send him cards by normal way, did you mention to him that in case of problems, no refund will be possible?

Our trade was a year ago. I don't remember we had this king of talk.

Hi.
Am I dreaming or we talk on here about a sale that took place on February 2008?

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:No.

Hi.
Did you offer to Stu55 to send the cards by Registrated Mail, to cover the loss in case of a problem? If you send him cards by normal way, did you mention to him that in case of problems, no refund will be possible?

Our trade was a year ago. I don't remember we had this king of talk.

Hi.
Am I dreaming or we talk on here about a sale that took place on February 2008?

It was at the time this started, like 6 months

stu55 wrote:

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:

dragsamou wrote:

yvel wrote:No.

Hi.
Did you offer to Stu55 to send the cards by Registrated Mail, to cover the loss in case of a problem? If you send him cards by normal way, did you mention to him that in case of problems, no refund will be possible?

Our trade was a year ago. I don't remember we had this king of talk.

Hi.
Am I dreaming or we talk on here about a sale that took place on February 2008?

It was at the time this started, like 6 months

Hi Stu55.
So this took place in November 2008, Yvel says it was a year ago.Does anyone of you guys remember or keep track, how this sale was supposed to happen? Cause, I won't be loosing time, if no one can proove evidence and answer precisely the simple questions that I ask.

November 2008, Right.

What do the exact details of the transaction date matter? Yvel already admitted Stu won the paypal case and drained his account. That certaintly is an admission of guilt; is it not?

ritnecrowin wrote:What do the exact details of the transaction date matter? Yvel already admitted Stu won the paypal case and drained his account. That certaintly is an admission of guilt; is it not?

Hi.
For my understanding of that 75$ sale that took place 6 monthes ago on the forum and that now takes 6 pages, I just want to closed that topic.This is Magiclibrarities, so if anything took place on Ebay, Paypal, MOTL, etc...This has nothing to do with this website.I'm right now, making a sale with one member, he will pay me by Paypal, I ask him if he wanted Insurance, he told me yes, meaning in case of any problems that could occured, he will get is money back, easy as that.So for me, if Stu55 requested an insurance, paid for it and Yvel didn't provide any, that's Yvel's responsability to refund him by any ways.If Stu55 didn't request an insurance and cards were sent without any, well Stu55 has to take the loss.

Annorax,

The deal was not done here, on this site. That is a mis-statement of the functions of this site and how the deal was handled.

The buyer and seller met here and then transacted a deal on their own. This site is not a store, nor is it a mediator or safe harbor.

The point of starting this discussion is NOT to have Yvel banned (or rather - it shouldn't have been for that reason.) It is to let the rest of the site know there may be an issue with making trades with Yvel. The secondary purpose is to attempt to put pressure on Yvel to resolve this transaction to the satisfaction of stu55.

Magic-belgium and I had a falling out over a $5,000 transaction. I didn't (and don't) expect magic-belgium to be banned. It is not this site's business to resolve our transaction. I started the discussion for almost the same reasons stu55 [should have] started his: A discussion about my/magic-belgium's transaction was had. Both sides voiced their opinions of what happened. A number of members read the accounts and statements. I assume that a few members now approach magic-belgium for trades/sales with caution (or refuse to deal with him), AND I assume some have made that same choice with me.

In the Yvel/stu55 instance: stu55 feels he was screwed over. He opened a topic and a discussion has been had. People will read the topic and comments and make their own judgments on who was in the right and who was in the wrong. Some will now refuse to deal with Yvel in the future (or deal with him with more caution), some will not deal with sut55 in the future (or deal with him with more caution).

The purpose of this site has nothing to do with managing transactions.

This site is for the dissemination of concrete information on rarities and normal Magic products. These forums are for discussions between people with like interests. A few sections of the forums are for links to external sales and auctions (transactions managed by other sites.) One section ("Trading General") is for "people who are selling" to meet "people who are buying" so they can go off and complete transactions on their own.

But nowhere is there a section where this site is overseeing any trades or sales.

This topic's purpose has been successfully met: the general populace of this forum is aware of the issue and both sides of the argument (as far as both parties feel they want to discuss it) and that is the end of it.

Dragsamou shouldn't ban Yvel any more than magic-belgium (or me). But this discussion should be kept someplace on the site so people can review it in the future and educate themselves on Yvel and stu55's actions and reactions (just like mine and magic-belgium.)

But to expect more from Dragsamou (or this site) is an incorrect interpretation of function of this site.

If you want to give feedback and have some basic protections for a transactions, go use eBay.

(I suspect I sound all high and mighty, or scolding. Sorry. Don't mean to. It just oozed out of my fingers that way. I am in the middle of a C# class... we are covering "overloaded operators"... must... stay... awake...)

Best regards,

Rainsford

Rainsford wrote:Annorax,

The deal was not done here, on this site. That is a mis-statement of the functions of this site and how the deal was handled.

The buyer and seller met here and then transacted a deal on their own. This site is not a store, nor is it a mediator or safe harbor.

The point of starting this discussion is NOT to have Yvel banned (or rather - it shouldn't have been for that reason.) It is to let the rest of the site know there may be an issue with making trades with Yvel. The secondary purpose is to attempt to put pressure on Yvel to resolve this transaction to the satisfaction of stu55.

Magic-belgium and I had a falling out over a $5,000 transaction. I didn't (and don't) expect magic-belgium to be banned. It is not this site's business to resolve our transaction. I started the discussion for almost the same reasons stu55 [should have] started his: A discussion about my/magic-belgium's transaction was had. Both sides voiced their opinions of what happened. A number of members read the accounts and statements. I assume that a few members now approach magic-belgium for trades/sales with caution (or refuse to deal with him), AND I assume some have made that same choice with me.

In the Yvel/stu55 instance: stu55 feels he was screwed over. He opened a topic and a discussion has been had. People will read the topic and comments and make their own judgments on who was in the right and who was in the wrong. Some will now refuse to deal with Yvel in the future (or deal with him with more caution), some will not deal with sut55 in the future (or deal with him with more caution).

The purpose of this site has nothing to do with managing transactions.

This site is for the dissemination of concrete information on rarities and normal Magic products. These forums are for discussions between people with like interests. A few sections of the forums are for links to external sales and auctions (transactions managed by other sites.) One section ("Trading General") is for "people who are selling" to meet "people who are buying" so they can go off and complete transactions on their own.

But nowhere is there a section where this site is overseeing any trades or sales.

This topic's purpose has been successfully met: the general populace of this forum is aware of the issue and both sides of the argument (as far as both parties feel they want to discuss it) and that is the end of it.

Dragsamou shouldn't ban Yvel any more than magic-belgium (or me). But this discussion should be kept someplace on the site so people can review it in the future and educate themselves on Yvel and stu55's actions and reactions (just like mine and magic-belgium.)

But to expect more from Dragsamou (or this site) is an incorrect interpretation of function of this site.

If you want to give feedback and have some basic protections for a transactions, go use eBay.

(I suspect I sound all high and mighty, or scolding. Sorry. Don't mean to. It just oozed out of my fingers that way. I am in the middle of a C# class... we are covering "overloaded operators"... must... stay... awake...)

Best regards,

Rainsford

Hi.
I would have not write better =D>

Rainsford wrote: I am in the middle of a C# class... we are covering "overloaded operators"... must... stay... awake...)

Sure wish this thread would go to sleep......

These are all good points, but I would like to offer a counterpoint to the first few sentences of Rainsford’s post. The following is a comment on the site’s policy and no individual’s guilt or innocence. There are quite a few precedents for websites taking action to protect their users from people with nefarious intentions and it is possible that some people have come to have high expectations for this sort of thing. There was a recent story about a social networking site that banned thousands of predators even though those individuals committed crimes outside of the website. I’m pretty sure we all support and expect that kind of action in order to keep people safe. Thankfully, stealing magic cards or a little money is a much less serious crime, but it’s still a real disappointment when it happens. This site has a large section of its forum dedicated to trading and some people may have expectations about a certain level of protection/supervision based on the policies of other sites that facilitate trading. I can understand not wanting to get into the middle of every dispute, but perhaps taking some simple actions such as making a “transaction complaints” sticky where people could post bad trades so the rest of us could have the opportunity to be informed once threads like this fade away with time. If this intervention is not wanted, a sticky with a policy that states trades are not monitored and caution should be used when trading may prevent further misunderstandings. The large number of post in this thread with differing opinions on what action is warranted clearly indicates a lack of knowledge of the more “hands-off” policy indicated by several of the previous posts. I have been a member of the site since Bob ran it and I’ve always been very casual about entering into trades since I’d been quite comfortable with the high moral quality of the average user, but the times may be gradually changing and some minor changes could go a long way to protecting the upstanding members of this community.

monkeymadness wrote:These are all good points, but I would like to offer a counterpoint to the first few sentences of Rainsford’s post. The following is a comment on the site’s policy and no individual’s guilt or innocence. There are quite a few precedents for websites taking action to protect their users from people with nefarious intentions and it is possible that some people have come to have high expectations for this sort of thing. There was a recent story about a social networking site that banned thousands of predators even though those individuals committed crimes outside of the website. I’m pretty sure we all support and expect that kind of action in order to keep people safe. Thankfully, stealing magic cards or a little money is a much less serious crime, but it’s still a real disappointment when it happens. This site has a large section of its forum dedicated to trading and some people may have expectations about a certain level of protection/supervision based on the policies of other sites that facilitate trading. I can understand not wanting to get into the middle of every dispute, but perhaps taking some simple actions such as making a “transaction complaints” sticky where people could post bad trades so the rest of us could have the opportunity to be informed once threads like this fade away with time. If this intervention is not wanted, a sticky with a policy that states trades are not monitored and caution should be used when trading may prevent further misunderstandings. The large number of post in this thread with differing opinions on what action is warranted clearly indicates a lack of knowledge of the more “hands-off” policy indicated by several of the previous posts. I have been a member of the site since Bob ran it and I’ve always been very casual about entering into trades since I’d been quite comfortable with the high moral quality of the average user, but the times may be gradually changing and some minor changes could go a long way to protecting the upstanding members of this community.

Hi.
You read my mind, I will create a section for that, talking right now with the moderators of how to name it.This topic is now closed.