#11

Living on the edge
It's my bad....Im used to hearing the words auction and raffle used by
shaving companies in relation to some charity...so it threw me off a bit.

No foul, carry on Mr Sotheby's.
#12

Doctor Strange of Wetshaving
Forio d'Ischia, Naples, Italy
The last sparks ...
It's quite psychedelic!!!
Tongue Tongue Tongue

DanLaw likes this post
Where there is a great desire there can be no great difficulty - Niccolò Machiavelli & Me
Greetings from Ischia. Pierpaolo
https://ischiapp.blogspot.com/
#13
Seems he caught wind of what's being said and transitioned it to a silent PM auction and deleted previous bids.

Standard and wyze0ne like this post
#14

Posting Freak
Peachtree City, GA
(This post was last modified: 06-28-2020, 06:10 PM by DanLaw.)
Can not post on behalf of Brett but will state the following:

Brett had begun accepting anonymous bids, posting the bid amount on their behalf. I respectfully raised the issue that accepting anonymous bids in a public auction on social media with the consignor acting as the arbiter raises the appearance of impropriety irrespective of the party’s actual integrity. A few people agreed. Brett then changed the terms to a silent auction which is much more appropriate if anonymous bids are accepted.  My perspective was based on experience with $SGR where private messenger transmitted raffle slot requests are not permitted even though a random number generator selects the winner.

Bottom line is MY perception is there nothing untoward going on in the auction nor did Brett change the format due to being called out for anything underhanded. Rather he changed the terms so all could operate on an equal footing.
#15
So the whole reason a bid was accepted that wasn’t posted publicly in the first place was because that specific bidder does not have an Instagram acct.

Standard likes this post
#16

Posting Freak
Peachtree City, GA
(This post was last modified: 06-28-2020, 07:19 PM by DanLaw.)
I did not see that reason posted nor did Brett state that when he posted the $325 bid - his statement specifically cited it an anonymous bid. Had Brett released a name with the bid would never have raised the question. Irrespective, Instagram does not screen membership as best aware so it requires little effort to join.  Was once called out on $SGR that it raised an appearance of impropriety to accept PMs when running what is announced as a public raffle on social media even when the person’s actual name was publicly disclosed and a random number generator operated by the admins selected the winner, hence why the question raised.

In any case, if accepting anonymous bids (which really was the primary issue), conducting the bidding as a silent auction is the way to go so all can enjoy the benefits of anonymity equally is my perspective. My take is Brett did the right thing
#17
Brett didn’t state that nor did he have to. I know who bid 325 and know for a fact that they didn’t post it on IG because they didn’t have an acct, nor did they have a desire to join - which is their right.
#18

Posting Freak
Peachtree City, GA
Agreed but then a name should have been released if it a public auction
#19
(06-28-2020, 07:21 PM)DanLaw Wrote: Agreed but then a name should have been released if it a public auction


I disagree but it doesn’t matter. It’s not my auction. Or yours.

Standard likes this post
#20

Posting Freak
Peachtree City, GA
Agreed


Users browsing this thread: