Scalping is discouraged on this forum, and so shouldn't all pro scalping posts also b

[316what]

like you said there is no 1 size fits all answer.

it would depend on some stuff like, why did i have it in my possession to begin with? how long did I own it?how did i hear about my friend needing it? why does my friend need it? will he just turn around and sell it?

i think my most likely answer would be I would try to accomplish a trade for something of equal "market value" that maybe he acquired at cost so it would be a favor for a favor thing and neither of us lost or gained.

You may join devilof76 and me on the island.

 

[ProgMatinee]

I think even most scalpers give cost breaks to friends -- though I'm not sure they owe it to them.

Do you "owe" friends anything? Is doing friends favors about returning obligations or doing things for them because you care about them. Do "friends" profiteer off of each other?

That really wasn't the initial question -- the question is do you owe any duty to complete strangers to give cost-breaks?

SnakeDoc

And that returns me to my point. Does hanging out on a board make us friends or strangers? Are we here to make money off each other or to meet friends? Somewhere in between?

I'm still not arguing whether scalping is right or wrong. But I do have a hard time connecting "hey we're friends and neighbors, we're a community" and "I just snagged extra Grey Hulk, who's willing to buy it".

 

[SnakeDoctor]

In that regard, you may be correct, but how will we ever know if we finally arrived at the "real" truth?

For example, what if a set of space explorers (going where no man has gone before) encounter a being that at first appearance, they believe to be God, but eventually, they discover he is only a child of a race of beings superior to theirs? Now what if a member of that race, created our planet and us? Is he a God? Is he "the" God?

I do not believe any person (of any religion) can know, for certain, the entire truth in this life. I am not sure whether the entire truth will ever be known by any of us.

I believe there are scientific truths which we can approach, and settle to the best of our ability. I believe there are some moral truths which are already settled, and some which are more complicated and where the right answer can only be revealed through the divine. I believe there are divine truths which will be revealed after this life is over. And, there may be some truths which could elude us entirely. This fact does not detract from the acknowledgement that there is a truth -- and it remains worth seeking.

I have tried to avoid any hint of evangelism in my answers, but find it difficult to get around the following statement:

As I have stated -- I am a Christian. I look to scripture for certain moral and divine truths that otherwise elude human answers. There is some malleability to scriptural interpretation which makes certain finer points debatable among Christians (like the date of Genesis, the mechanics of Creation, etc.) -- but certain other truths are clearly defined therein.

SnakeDoc

 

[lcummins]

...The majority in the south didn't want civil rights, but it came and they learned to accept it because the government decided that it had to be.

Kind of my point... man decides what is right or wrong... but that doesn't mean it is right or wrong.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

Only specific people.

It all depends on the going rate for the item in question AND how long it has been unavailable. If it's a recently sold out item, friends can buy it from me for C+S+S. If it's something like Gray Hulk PF, then friends can buy it for less than the going rate, but that will be more than original price. And my friends wouldn't expect me to sell them my Gray Hulk PF for original price, but they would appreciate me selling it to them for less than the going rate....even though I'm still making a profit.

There isn't a 1 size fits all answer for the 2nd question.

I think I've said this in here before (in one thread or another)

Please don't look in my For Sale thread with the Hot Toys Predators

 

[Skiman]

And that returns me to my point. Does hanging out on a board make us friends or strangers? Are we here to make money off each other or to meet friends? Somewhere in between?

I'm still not arguing whether scalping is right or wrong. But I do have a hard time connecting "hey we're friends and neighbors, we're a community" and "I just snagged extra Grey Hulk, who's willing to buy it".

I think you would offer it to your friend first, like first dibs. Also it might be a little cheaper as oppose to someone you didn't know from the board.

You are only friends on the board with others once you make friends with, I don't think just because we are all on the same board that we are all friends automatically.

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Do you "owe" friends anything? Is doing friends favors about returning obligations or doing things for them because you care about them. Do "friends" profiteer off of each other?

I think friends are owed a duty of honesty, forthrightness and full disclosure. I don't think my friends owe me a price break, though I would gladly accept one. And, I treat them as I would like to be treated. I would give price breaks to friends ... though I am less likely to give one to a friend that thinks I owe it to them.

That being said, there is nothing wrong with making profit off of a friend, so long as you are selling them something they genuinely want, you aren't swindling them, and they fully understand the value and price of the item they're buying. I'm not sure if you distinguish between "profiting" and "profiteering".

And that returns me to my point. Does hanging out on a board make us friends or strangers? Are we here to make money off each other or to meet friends? Somewhere in between?

I'm still not arguing whether scalping is right or wrong. But I do have a hard time connecting "hey we're friends and neighbors, we're a community" and "I just snagged extra Grey Hulk, who's willing to buy it".

I would say strangers for the most part, though results can vary. Its a case-by-case thing. I'm not particularly close with anyone here -- nobody here even knows my actual name. I wouldn't say board membership equates to automatic friendship.

SnakeDoc

 

[ProgMatinee]

thats true and i think thats a big difference from back in the 90s. in the 90s when rec.arts.whatever.starwars newgroup was around many people i knew lived in colorado and we became a side group that actually met several times a year and traded items that were hard to find and it was always done at cost.

then around 2000 or whenever news groups went out of vogue the smaller groups of legit "friends" gave way to these mega boards like rebelscum and here. friendships still happen but i think the scale of the places makes it pretty hard.

i know personally i don't charge friends to move furniture or help paint their house.

not sure if its the same thing but if i asked a friend to give me a lift to the airport and he said "going cab rate is $20" i would raise my eyebrows for sure.

 

[lcummins]

I do not believe any person (of any religion) can know, for certain, the entire truth in this life. I am not sure whether the entire truth will ever be known by any of us.

I believe there are scientific truths which we can approach, and settle to the best of our ability. I believe there are some moral truths which are already settled, and some which are more complicated and where the right answer can only be revealed through the divine. I believe there are divine truths which will be revealed after this life is over. And, there may be some truths which could elude us entirely. This fact does not detract from the acknowledgement that there is a truth -- and it remains worth seeking.

I have tried to avoid any hint of evangelism in my answers, but find it difficult to get around the following statement:

As I have stated -- I am a Christian. I look to scripture for certain moral and divine truths that otherwise elude human answers. There is some malleability to scriptural interpretation which makes certain finer points debatable among Christians (like the date of Genesis, the mechanics of Creation, etc.) -- but certain other truths are clearly defined therein.

SnakeDoc

But therein lies the problem... if a person doesn't have the same (or any) belief system, then why should they accept what is right and wrong from someone who does believe? Who is right? Who is wrong? Should they be forced to accept the morals of the majority who do have a belief system in place?

Here is an analogy... Some people just don't keep their office neat and tidy, and have stacks of papers, magazines and books, etc. all over their desk, yet they are organized. Their management however, believes in being neat and tidy and forces them to clean their desk... now they can't find anything and their productivity decreases. Was management right? Should management force their beliefs on the worker, even to the detriment of productivity? Why is management right?

 

[ProgMatinee]

might is right.

 

[The Ween]

Replaced with important information.....

I hate getting poked in the eye.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

"Nobody owes nobody nothing."
~~Rocky Balboa

 

[The Ween]

So why does everything taste like chicken, do we really know what chicken taste like?

What if it's more of a squirrel kind of meat...

SQUIRREL!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Skiman]

"Nobody owes nobody nothing."
~~Rocky Balboa

SQUIRREL!!!!!!!!!!!

LOVE IT>.....

 

[SnakeDoctor]

But therein lies the problem... if a person doesn't have the same (or any) belief system, then why should they accept what is right and wrong from someone who does believe? Who is right? Who is wrong? Should they be forced to accept the morals of the majority who do have a belief system in place?

A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

To the extent personal morality does not affect someone else, people should be left to choose how to live their lives. Personal morality should not be legislated -- and any religious conversion or moral epiphany is between the individual and the Almighty.

My moral objections to certain practices do not detract from your right to live as you want. You have the right to choose how to live, and I have the right to judge the choices you make according to my standards of morality. Our government has sought to protect certain divinely granted rights via Constitutional restrictions -- freedom of speech, armament, worship, etc.

This is to be distinguished from immoral behavior which affects others -- murder, assault, drunk driving, theft, etc. These can and should be legislated -- and those who disagree that drunk driving is immoral (for example) are kinda S.O.L. -- except insofar as they can seek a jurisdiction which shares their tolerance for drunk driving.

Here is an analogy... Some people just don't keep their office neat and tidy, and have stacks of papers, magazines and books, etc. all over their desk, yet they are organized. Their management however, believes in being neat and tidy and forces them to clean their desk... now they can't find anything and their productivity decreases. Was management right? Should management force their beliefs on the worker, even to the detriment of productivity? Why is management right?

Here we seem to be discussing authority, not judgment. I would say that whether management's estimation is right or wrong is not relevant to employees. Management has the authority, by virtue of the position given by ownership, to impose their judgment. Employees have the right to raise concerns to superiors, or leave the job. Whether the judgment of management was correct is up to ownership, not employees, to determine.

SnakeDoc

 

[devilof76]

You obviously are an advocate of unrestricted capitalism, whereas I am not.

Obviously. Should I add proudly to it as well?

I have to ask, are you a satanist?

What the christ...

Well, there is Devil in his screenname, and his attitude is rather amoral.

Actually, I am the devil. And I taught Ayn Rand everything she knew.

Amoral? You want to take that one back? I'm giving you one chance.

I believe this applies :Objectivism is the philosophy created by the Russian-American philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand (1905–1982).[1] Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness; that individual persons are in direct contact with reality through sensory perception; that human beings can gain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic; that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest; that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in pure laissez faire capitalism;" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

I apologize if I am mistaken on this. If he says he isn't, I'll accept that, but I have talked to Satanists online before, and I get a rather similar vibe from him.

I am. You're right. Ayn Rand was the only philosopher in history with the balls to not fall for all of the garbage you have imbibed, apparently undiluted. That's why there are answers for your nonsense now, whereas there weren't in the 1920's, or the 1680's, or the 1000 years that Christendom ruled Europe, half in chaos, half in stagnant, bureaucratic decay. But they were working on it. The Italian Renaissance, the Scientific Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, and the American Revolution were all steps in freeing man from the primitivism that false philosophies had kept him bound with for centuries. Rand was simply the last piece of the puzzle: she discovered the completely consistent philosophic system that justified all that made Western civilization morally good.

(2) Ayn Rand was a capitalist, and wrote a good book or two ... but she was also a bit of a nut. Her unique brand of objectivist capitalism was openly hostile to religion and morality. She is hardly representative of all capitalists (just as you are hardly representative of all people with "ethics"). William F. Buckley, a Catholic libertarian/conservative capitalist, knew Ayn Rand, and thought Rand was a hedonistic loony, and her followers tantamount to a cult. Having read quite a bit of Buckley in my time, I am also quite confident Buckley would've had no moral problem with people reselling toys for a substantial profit.

Rand was opposed to religion, and Buckley took that personally. I'm pretty sure that anyone suggesting to Buckley that religious ethics were subjective, and that only a scientifically derived--i.e. rational--ethics would have greatly offended him. He was one of her main antagonists during the years they were both alive, and she considered him to be worse (intellectually and politically) than a great many of her liberal critics. Set Buckley's opinion of her aside for a moment and read the passage above that described her philosophy. Then, tell me which part of that is irrational, and/or qualifies her as a nut.

 

[Blackthornone]

Amoral? You want to take that one back? I'm giving you one chance.

I do want to be fair. You SEEM to have many rather amoral tendencies to me. But if you deny being amoral, I am not going to accuse you of being absolutely amoral. I will take it back gladly, since you deny it. However I find many of your positions to on economics to be indeed amoral. Amoral is not the same as immoral.


"Amoralism is the complete absence of moral beliefs, and/or the unequivocal belief that the theory of morality is immaterial.[1][2]

Though often associated with immoralism, the two are fundamentally different.[1] Immoralism is a system that does not accept moral principles and directly opposes morality, while amoralism does not even consider the existence of morality plausible.[3]"
Aside from this, you seem to agree with me that you agree with some of the tenets of modern Satanism. Based on that, and the fact that the devil is in your name, don't you think that you being a Satanist might be a reasonable speculation? (But not an accusation.) A lot of people misunderstand Satanism, and mistakenly believe it is all about devil worship, which it is not. So you aren't a Satanist, then. Maybe you are a Satanist and don't even know it? I kid, I kid.....

 

[Bubbles]

I've ordered 2 PZ carcass Ex's solely to flip on ebay, i've no morals.

 

[Voorhees27]

Amoral? You want to take that one back? I'm giving you one chance.

Internet is serious business.

 

[Blackthornone]

I've ordered 2 PZ carcass Ex's solely to flip on ebay, i've no morals.

Well, PZ isn't exactly something that IMO, a really nice person would like, so I think I will give you a pass on that one.