another shill bidder

[Sam]

http://blog.domainlore.co.uk/beware-of-the-fraudster.html

 

[rob]

Is Admin going to boot off http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/members/thecat.html ?

 

[Alien]

Do they ever learn? :???:

 

[retired_member21]

Kudos Denys - he's doing a great job

 

[anthony]

Nothing gets past Denys.

 

[thecat]

Firstly, that is me and someone I work with.

Secondly, I've sent the proof to Denys that clearly shows I had nothing to do with the reversals but rather my bank / paypal caused the problem without warning. He is not the only one who has had payments reversed and I've spent a lot of today sorting this out and paying people.

Thirdly, we have been buying some finance domains (mainly payday ones) recently and Sam thought the paydayloansfast.org.uk was a good domain for us to have so he bid on it. Problem was we already owned it.

A fraudster I am not, I have bought and sold a few domains on here without any complication in the past and that I believe includes you Alien with the paydayloansblog domain and with several other people. I don't have a big reputation because I'm not a big player and I do not pretend to be.

My attitude was not brilliant with the guy, but then receiving an opening email accusing me of stealing money is never going to be meant with a smile and a handshake.

 

[rob]

Firstly, that is me and someone I work with.

Secondly, I've sent the proof to Denys that clearly shows I had nothing to do with the reversals but rather my bank / paypal caused the problem without warning. He is not the only one who has had payments reversed and I've spent a lot of today sorting this out and paying people.

Thirdly, we have been buying some finance domains (mainly payday ones) recently and Sam thought the paydayloansfast.org.uk was a good domain for us to have so he bid on it. Problem was we already owned it.

A fraudster I am not, I have bought and sold a few domains on here without any complication in the past and that I believe includes you Alien with the paydayloansblog domain and with several other people. I don't have a big reputation because I'm not a big player and I do not pretend to be.

My attitude was not brilliant with the guy, but then receiving an opening email accusing me of stealing money is never going to be meant with a smile and a handshake.

How about this bit:

"First domain sold: spanishwine.org.uk but did not even bother to reply to the buyer after numerous contact attempts. The mobile phone number provided during registration is originating from Switzerland and calls were never answered. The sale has failed."

?

Source: http://blog.domainlore.co.uk/beware-of-the-fraudster.html

 

[thecat]

That's fair enough, I did not follow up on that.

 

[Alien]

I have bought and sold a few domains on here without any complication in the past and that I believe includes you Alien with the paydayloansblog domain and with several other people.

Yes, indeed that is correct. Our transaction via Acorn for the Payday Loans Blog name was professional and pleasant (as can be seen by my trader rating/feedback).

 

[rob]

Thirdly, we have been buying some finance domains (mainly payday ones) recently and Sam thought the paydayloansfast.org.uk was a good domain for us to have so he bid on it. Problem was we already owned it.

Just seen this 'update':

Could be worth looking at http://blog.domainlore.co.uk/beware-of-the-fraudster.html as its either true, or libel.

 

[retired_member21]

Interesting point - would it matter if you stick [SIC] next to it or does that not mean much ?

Just for future reference

 

[thecat]

Sam has used the site and not been logged in. Something we have all done.

I'm fed up with dealing with this really. I've made a mistake with my initial response to Denys, I've apologised, I ensured the bill was paid immediately, and I've explained everything that needed to be explained.

 

[BREWSTERS]

I don't know but I wouldn't want to rely on it. Regardless of whether Deny's is correct, his statements potentially expose him to being sued for libel. Defending a libel suit is expensive.

So can bringing one be...especially if things are stacked against you.

Godfrey sued people he knew had assets (why sue someone who has relatively little)? On that basis an aggrieved individual who felt he/she had been libelled could decide to sue if he/she felt that another party had valuable assets indirectly worth pursuing.

You have entered this thread with an interesting gist - care to elaborate on why you focus on libel rather than the shill aspect?

 

[The Ferryman]

Regardless of whether Deny's is correct,.....

......Godfrey sued people he knew had assets

An interesting use of the greengrocer's apostrophe.

If the case was Demon v Godfrey, then Godfrey didn't sue anyone, Demon did.

Regards

Bruce

 

[BREWSTERS]

If someone's been liabled, they've been liabled. That can occur regardless of whether the underlying facts are true.

I'm quite sure you are meaning 'libel', not 'liable'

And it is totally dependent on the underlying facts being true or not. If they are true, then it isn't libel.

I responded to something that another poster had suggested could be liabelous. Unfortunately he quoted it and that wasn't a good thing to do. Scroll up and see for yourself. Shill bidding is wrong but I didn't have anything to add regarding that element because I was just a spectator. I support removal/the banning of people who break web site T&Cs from respective web sites but there are ways to do it professionally and writing potentially defamatory blog posts about it isn't, in my opinion, a right way. Statistically some users will try to cheat on an auction site. Accept it, ban them if you feel they have attempted to do so and move on. Have a page listing the number of users banned per week/month/year if you wish but don't make the mistake of identifying them to all who care to look.

Isn't one of the major plus points of using forums, that of having a good idea who you're potentially dealing with? With the way this end of the market works which is largely faceless, all we have to go on is online reputation.

One thing that seems really dumb is when a member 'outs' someone for bad practice, and then lots of others who've also had bad dealings with that person come out of the woodwork. Perhaps if the first guy had said something straight away it could've saved others some pain.

Don't you want to know if someone you're thinking of dealing with is reliable or not?

 

[Retired_member41]

So what sort of costs would be involved if say you did want to sue someone for libel?

Let's say an employer wrote down reasons why a person was fired to a third party which were totally false.

What Would this be classed as?

Could say the director who wrote the letter claim he had been mis informed by a manager?

I know it's cheeky asking but my friend has been well had over and would love to know. Still bothers her today.

Was a few years ago so maybe you are limited on time?

 

[BREWSTERS]

If you read back up, you will hopefully be able to see that it wasn't me who introduced the idea of the blog post potentially being libellous. Rob said the post could potentially have been libellous and I pointed out that, if so, him reposting it was in essence the same thing.

What does this have to do with my reply (post 19) - which you quoted?

The majority of transactions that occur over the Internet are probably faceless. Domain names, as just another intangible asset, are not unique there. It's probably more about how some individuals who buy and sell domain names choose to operate than anything else.

This wasn't about a forum but about an auction web site which anyone can join. There may well be people who use the auction site who don't have the inclination to come on here. There will also be plenty of people who read this forum but will never post on here, so they won't be known. Finally many of us don't have the time to remember who is who.

If it wasn't for the blog post being posted on AD, I for one wouldn't have known who the member was.

I don't have a problem with someone posting their factual experiences, I'd actually encourge that, but there are ways to do it and ways not to do it.

Care to give an example of how you believe it should've been done?

The answer to that question doesn't justify knowing so by any means necessary.

Addition: for further clarification I'm happy to read about people's factual experiences. The difficulty arises when people personalise it and make further accusations and statements, potentially getting into the realms of defamation. That's where libel could come in, not by the mere posting of details about what actually happened. Not withstanding the fact that it doesn't look "professional" when someone operating an auction site goes on a long blog post rant about how a user did what. Imagine Sedo or eBay doing that. What if, for some reason, they were proven wrong and had to retract?

They (Sedo and Ebay) would likely have a cleaner operation with fewer sham operators.