status-resolved Wrong decision made by Amanda- Sstick.com

[omelet]

Here is the post:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/sold.1051655/#post-6457934


@Silentptnr posted $1

Later, I posted $5 bin before the auction finished.

I wrote "bin" only because seller updated the title by including information "Bin 5"

Later, I and seller contacted each other and about to finish the deal.

Then, @Amanda came in with the statement:
"The BIn was never updated in the thread or in the original post. At this time the winner is Silentptnr. Please contact each other and finalize the details.
Thank you."



I personally really shocked by @Amanda decision. My $5 offer was submitted before the auction finished, and I had the right to submit it. Even though seller didn't update his Bin price properly (he didnt update in post, only updated in the title), my $5 offer still the valid offer.

Let me ask you, if I wrote "$5", rather than "$5 Bin", does that make any difference? Obviously from @Amanda perspective, "$5" is valid, "$5 Bin" is not valid.


I dont understand. I think her power is abused.This doesn't make any sense for me.

Plus, @Amanda never responded me. I don't understand too.

She made the decision, she refused to listen my explanation, she closed the post, and she claimed game over.

A real Rape.

 

[Silentptnr]

You do however sound pretty full of yourself. Guess its easier to be magnanimous and open minded when its not your 1$ at risk.

My words and intentions are pure. I have nothing to lose or gain. Omelet has always been very kind to me. And I have been kind too.

 

[Haris]

Lets start a slush fund, raise $4 to send omlette so he can treasure what is not really important.

I am going to go fill my truck up with gas, and pay for it with love

Unless @Mister Funsky is feeling generous and wishes to pay for it

what's wrong with you?

 

[promo]

Great you are happy with your conduct and you feel objective enough to asses your own actions as kind and honourable. Not many men are arrogant enough to do so efficiently in their own eyes.

 

[omelet]

Lets start a slush fund, raise $4 to send omlette so he can treasure what is not really important.

I am going to go fill my truck up with gas, and pay for it with love

Unless @Mister Funsky is feeling generous and wishes to pay for it

Man, that something you never understand till you last moment.

 

[Silentptnr]

Great you are happy with your conduct and you feel objective enough to asses your own actions as kind and honourable. Not many men are arrogant enough to do so efficiently in their own eyes.

What i know is that i did nothing wrong. Your words imply something different.

 

[omelet]

I gonna poop

By guys

 

[Silentptnr]

I gonna poop

By guys

Lol

 

[Silentptnr]

Im gonna have an ice cream cone.

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

I gonna poop

By guys

Thats gross, make sure you wipe properly.

Haris, this is business. Sorry rules meant to be followed, by everyone.

The seller is in the wrong mostly out of the 3 parties involved. If they dont know, and cant follow the rules, they should not be selling.


Threads like this are whats killing namepros

 

[Silentptnr]

I take buying and selling domains very seriously. I value my business relationships and play by the rules. My business stays clean and simple that way.

My decisions and actions are based on honest dealings, a good heart, and following the rules both when buying and when selling.

This matter has been appropriately handled by all parties involved.

The rules of the auction forum are clear and they work. They protect all of us.

There is no reason for any disagreement. No one has cheated or done anything wrong. There was a mistake and it was corrected and made right.

If the rules change in the future, we will all have to follow them. Until that time, we all must follow the existing rules.

 

[omelet]

Thats gross, make sure you wipe properly.

Haris, this is business. Sorry rules meant to be followed, by everyone.

The seller is in the wrong mostly out of the 3 parties involved. If they dont know, and cant follow the rules, they should not be selling.


Threads like this are whats killing namepros

Master, may I borrow some toilet paper? Not enough, so many shit

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

Omelet! Are you on the toilet with your phone again?

 

[omelet]

Yes. I feel lonely

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

Grab an ice cream and go to the park

 

[omelet]

I don’t have ice cream here

I can have two scoop of poop for the park

 

[MasterOfMyDomains]

 

[promo]

What i know is that i did nothing wrong. Your words imply something different.

As already stated I am thouroughly impressed by your ability to self evaluate your actions.

 

[Silentptnr]

As already stated I am thouroughly impressed by your ability to self evaluate your actions.

Thanks sir!

 

[Mister Funsky]

Unless @Mister Funsky is feeling generous and wishes to pay for it

Sure...be glad to. You want a free coffee with that fill up? (I assume you are needy otherwise you would not ask)

 

[mad409]

This appears to be settled but I have a question for clarification, pertaining to 6.2.6 rule.

6.2.6. All valid bids are binding and cannot be retracted. Bids are void when outbid by another member. Auctions and bids that are unclear, illegible, conducted outside of the public listing (e.g. via direct message), contain inaccurate information or invalid amounts are considered null and void.

This says that Auctions that contain inaccurate information are null and void. So I understand 6.2.3 but 6.2.6 appears to suggest the auction should have been considered null and void. This auction was updated with inaccurate information, there wasn't a proper bin listed. Therefore it would be null and void. 6.2.6 not only applies to bids but auctions too.

The only reason I'm asking I feel this is useful information. Thanks..

 

[jagankvel]

Hi Pros,

Rules and law is to benefit people, but not make them a slave,

i hope this thread is great lesson for everybody. cool....

rgds
jagan.k

 

[Eric Lyon]

Hello,

Thanks for the feedback in this thread. We're always open to improving our processes and rules. Your input helps with that.

Our current policy is to extend an auction if an invalid bid takes place, such as what happened here. However, this situation wasn't brought to our attention in time and the auction had already ended by the time we got involved. At that point, it was too late for us to extend the auction and we had to assign a winner based on the rules. Since the BIN post was invalid, we couldn't consider it as a bid, because other bidders wouldn't have thought that they could bid above it (a BIN means the auction ends) and that's not a fair bid. It wouldn't be fair to make an invalid BIN into a bid in which no one knows they can outbid. So it really adds a lot of confusion when it happens and it's not brought to our attention before the auction ends.

Another option would be for the auction to have been rerun from scratch once we got involved, but that can lead to other issues of manipulation: if a seller doesn't want to sell, they can have someone else mess up their auction so that it gets rerun. We wouldn't want to open the floodgates on that.

We hope to add features in the near future to make these situations automated and less prone to any sort of human error. Until then, we appreciate help from the community to catch these things before the auction ends and help remind our moderators if they forget to follow the procedure of extending an auction when something disrupts the flow of an auction.

We greatly appreciate the help.

6.2.6. All valid bids are binding and cannot be retracted. Bids are void when outbid by another member. Auctions and bids that are unclear, illegible, conducted outside of the public listing (e.g. via direct message), contain inaccurate information or invalid amounts are considered null and void.

Failing to add a BIN to the first post does not make an auction contain inaccurate information. On the contrary, it is missing information that isn't required. It only becomes required if a seller wants to actually sell at that BIN, but even then, it's missing and missing doesn't mean it contains inaccurate information.

Hope that helps,

 

[xynames]

I just noticed this thread.

Sellers must be careful when creating a BIN in an auction to post it both in the original post of the thread (via editing) and in any new post made in the auction thread otherwise the BIN is invalid.

This scenario described in this thread happened to me the buyer in an auction thread last week but as the other bidder and I, and the seller, were all of us fine with the result there was no dispute among the parties. But still the rule must be followed.

I’d add that the moderator Amanda worked overtime although she didn’t have to to clean up the thread which such clean up work would normally have been done by the seller, but since the thread had been locked, clean up could only be done by a mod. Thank you Amanda.

 

[james haw]

Let me ask you, if I wrote "$5", rather than "$5 Bin", does that make any difference?

Of course it makes a difference, the two are different things.

It's perhaps not your fault if you didn't know the BIN was added illegitimately, which sucks. But your unfortunate scenario doesn't overrule the BIN being null and void. Sure it could have been handled a different way, maybe "better", but I don't think Amanda did anything wrong. She just enforced the rules accurately, as asked to do.

And be fair - having time to think and debate in hindsight in this thread makes it so much easier to come to a better decision, as opposed to when you have to make a quick decision at the time.

I am with Omelet. If a 5$ offer was made within the auction time frame that should be a valid bid. Regardless of the phrasing.

So does that mean if an auction BIN is set to $10 (legitimate BIN) and someone posts "$10 BIN", and then someone else posts "$11", the 2nd offer would be valid because we ignore phrasing?
That's the reason for definitions, so options are clear with precision meaning.

These problems would not occur if, auction threads were different then the usual forum threads, sellers would fill forms putting expiry, registrar, and all the information required

I think it would help, and I suggested something like that here
https://www.namepros.com/threads/what-should-namepros-add.920208/page-5#post-5679051

It would catch a few people I guess - if BIN was submitted empty then you cannot edit it later.
But people would just put "TBA" or "10 million $" and edit it later. I guess the real solution would be to have a form, which was editable at any point but limits could be put in place. IE if a bid is placed certain things couldn't happen such as BIN can only be changed twice (etc).