FS: Enlightened Equipment 0 degree top quilt

[mbnow]

Oh Great! now I disagree with at least 3 lawyers...

Applying the UCC to this forum may be a good thing . but it also may not.
i like the "i'll take it, pending questions" for reasons already stated.

Think of craigslist, if i call up someone and say "hey i'm really interested in the item you have listed, but i just need to see it" the seller has absolutely no obligation to wait or to sell it to you or for that matter, do anything at all.
But a forum such as this has a more cohesive membership that is somewhat self regulated and trustworthy, buying and selling items here is NOT like buying from a business, it is NOT like buying from craigslist. What it is is a friendly forum where the members have a high regard and vested interest in the transaction going well.
"I'll take it pending questions" changes nothing except to be more open that there needs clarification on the specific item being sold. With the intention of being purchased.
Thats it.
Yes the "law" and its interpretations may argue differently but the understanding is clear and in an environment like this forum that truly is all that matters. And of course the final word from the mods!
Which i will be happy to comply with whenever they make a decision.

Also i absolutely agree, no need for apologies for this thread, it is something that does need addressing, so we can all play by the same rules.

Well thats my 2 more...Oh Lordy,,,,, i think i am up to 95 cents now.

Matt.

[^shane^]

Look...

If I have a widget to sell, and Bobby says "I'll take it pending questions" I'm going to interpret that as "I might take it." I'll answer the question, but I'm still stuck... not sure if my widget is moving or not.

If Chuck comes along and says "I'll take it! Send me your paypal info," after I've answered Bobby's question but before Bobby says "Yep, I want it," then no disrespect to Bobby, but Chuck has money in hand. I'm selling it to Chuck.

I've had a car sold out from under me while I was doing the deal. I think this has gotten out of hand with law thrown around. We are hammock campers here. We buy stuff, we try stuff, we sell the stuff we won't use. I'd bet these guys would all get together and share a nice frosty beverage and shake their heads at what has happened to this thread. Hell, I thought the quilt must be some kind of special with 2 pages of posts. I might have had to pony up for the next great thing. Now I'm kind of mad that I won't get the 15 minutes back I've spent trying to figure out the legalese in this threads.

Mods, I propose a new change to the terms of service. Threads with legalese are immediately locked. This mumbo jumbo makes my head hurt. No disrespect meant to anyone. I could bore you to death with pharmacology if you aren't careful though. Just sayin...

[mbnow]

Look...

If I have a widget to sell, and Bobby says "I'll take it pending questions" I'm going to interpret that as "I might take it." I'll answer the question, but I'm still stuck... not sure if my widget is moving or not.

If Chuck comes along and says "I'll take it! Send me your paypal info," after I've answered Bobby's question but before Bobby says "Yep, I want it," then no disrespect to Bobby, but Chuck has money in hand. I'm selling it to Chuck.

^This is exactly what does not happen on this forum because "i'll take it pending questions" has been accepted as "i'll take it"
And the mods would have stepped in to stop you selling the widget to Chuck.
Although this is a quasi anonymous forum it is still a friendly, small community, and disputes over transactions whatever the reason, are typically resolved by the mods. Without a lot of legal verbiage and open interpretation.
I agree it hurts my head too.
Also i agree, lets have a cold one !! Cheers!

[^shane^]

^This is exactly what does not happen on this forum because "i'll take it pending questions" has been accepted as "i'll take it"
And the mods would have stepped in to stop you selling the widget to Chuck.

Read the whole thread again... I think you missed a few posts.

Actually, Sol_Invictus would have dibs with this line: "I will take it pending questions". It can't get any clearer than that. Sol_Invictus would have to let it go to the next person only if he chose to. I know it seems like a grey area, but we go by first "I'll take it" posts... what's your reasoning?

And then...

Don't be sorry. We have been ruling the opposite way than you describe. An "I'll take it" is an "I'll take it", questions or not. There are no rules (yet) regarding conditionals, so one could assume that there are none.

And then...

We'll get a ruling, please stand by.

NCPatrick states there are no rules yet regarding conditionals (and no ruling yet in this thread), so they can't tell me who I can and cannot sell to. Once the rule is in place in the TOS, whether I like it or not, I'll live with it because I really like this place...

I've been on this forum a long time. I've watched, and wanted, a lot of FOR SALE threads. I've usually seen first money in gets it. I've also seen a lot of "I'll take it pending" where the seller later says "no thanks." That's not fair to someone with money in hand ready to buy. I'll just be sure to include "I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, BUT FIRST UNCONDITIONAL 'I'LL TAKE IT' GETS IT" on anything I want to sell in the future.

Can't believe I'm even involved in this mess... Baseball is on... I'm out. Go RANGERS.

[Jcavenagh]

Pharmacology? Now your getting into my past...urp!
It WAS THE 70's MAN, LEAVE IT ALONE!

[canteen boy]

The mods must be in a wifi dead zone.

[catalyst]

The mods must be in a wifi dead zone.

They're all out hangin'!

[angrysparrow]

Sorry for the delay guys, two of us were indeed out for the weekend. I don't think NCP is back yet.

The mods discussed it, and the consensus is that conditional claims can't override unconditional ones.

catalyst was right to sell to sidewinder. Sol's offer, while first, came with the stipulation of a question. That would have been fine if he had stayed in the thread to confirm the claim as soon as the question was answered. But, a few hours later sidewinder's no stipulation 'I'll Take It' post took the question out of the equation.

If a buyer has a question, it's up to them to ask and then make a firm claim if they want it as soon as the question is answered. But, it wouldn't be right to the sellers for conditional claims to act as placeholders in a transaction.

I think we've all lost out or gotten passed over on a deal at some point, because we were thinking about it or asking questions. It's not fun. But, honoring unconditional 'I'll Take It' posts are the most fair and straightforward method we have.

[Boulderman]

I'm happy to see the Mods rule this way. Good call.

[mbnow]

Just to clarify:

"i'll take it, pending questions" was good if the buyer had responded in a reasonable time to the questions.
If not the next "i'll take it" is on.?

Matt.