eBay to Hide Winning Bidders
Frank Provasek
in an effort to "combat fraud." Sellers will still be able to view
all bidder IDs on their own listings, and feedback pages will
continue to show buyer and seller IDs. eBay's announcement
stated, "This change was designed to protect bidders from fake
Second Chance Offers and other malicious emails."
http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y08/m10/i29/s01
(How do you send a fake second-chance offer to the WINNING bidder?)
Bruce Remick
"Frank Provasek" <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote in message
news:ced46a0c-1bd2-45cd...@h60g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Why do you need to see the winning bidder's ID in an auction that's not
yours?
You seem obsessed with looking for things to complain about on eBay that
shouldn't really affect you.
Regardless of whether or not you understand or agree with eBay's motives for
the new rule, it's certainly something that you should be able to live with,
work around, or just plain ignore.
RF
news:xo2Ok.35746$bK.1...@newsfe04.iad...
>
> You seem obsessed with looking for things to complain about on eBay
> that shouldn't really affect you.
Fwankie's had a bug up his ass ever since eBay stripped him of his
"Power Seller" status.
Charles Cooper
> yours?
agreed......I don't want anyone to see when I accidentally win with my
shill. This is one more positive step by eBay to help me ensure that I can
maximize profits with strategic bidding tactics.
MJKolodziej
"Charles Cooper" <cco...@udoit.org> wrote in message
news:34edncKF2vg524zU...@bright.net...
You are a fountain of useful information.
mk
Reid Goldsborough
> Why do you need to see the winning bidder's ID in an auction that's not
> yours?
Here's why this is bad. This is how people get tipped off -- or used
to get tipped off -- that they're about to become victim of
counterfeit fraud, which as you no doubt know is rampant there.
Many people have been active alerting winning bidders to known
forgeries that they were about to buy as authentic coins despite this
being against eBay rules and despite risking their eBay I.D.s. Selling
forgeries is against eBay rules too though eBay is far more active and
spends far more resources in stopping "auction interference" than
auction fraud. With this new rule, the alerting of fraud will stop and
the selling of forgeries will only increase yet further in frequency.
Watch these Chinese forgeries explode on the market.
Others do it differently, but what I've personally been doing when
coming across transparently blatant forgery scams, if I have the time
(not enough time in the day ...) and inclination, is pointing
"winning" bidders to Web pages I or others have done about a
particular forgery type, giving them a chance to educate themselves.
No auction interference, just providing an educational service. This
will now be impossible too.
Bruce Remick
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgold...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:faee1169-99ac-4ebb...@v13g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
If some winning bidders are inclined to respond to third party post-auction
offers-- fraudulent or otherwise-- then they should be prepared to accept
any risks, as well as the wrath of eBay. I would venture that the vast
majority of items auctioned on eBay are not items that are being
counterfeited. With coins, I don't believe it's the obligation of the
educated to warn eBay bidders of a potential counterfeit. Who's to say
that the "warner" isn't a scammer or competitor himself? If one must take
up the cause, simply warn eBay about a suspicious auction. That should
satisfy any moral obligation. Otherwise, I still don't see why an honest
person should be that concerned about not seeing the ID of a winning bidder
in someone else's auction.
Reid Goldsborough
> With coins, I don't believe it's the obligation of the
> educated to warn eBay bidders of a potential counterfeit.
It's not about moral obligation. It's about volenteerism, about users
helping users. No one is obligated to warn others about scam auctions.
But now those who would choose to can't. Warning eBay itself is
generally futile because in the vast majority of cases it doesn't read
messages sent to it but just sends back an automated response that
they received the message.
From its start the Internet has been about communication. Yahoo
Auctions failed in part because it prohibited users from
communicating. eBay has been gradually cutting back on user
communication, and now it has ended it. Its discussion boards are
useless here in that they're heavily censored. eBay, with no viable
competition, can pretty much do as it pleases.
mazorj
I don't do much on e-Bay, but isn't that one way to spot a possible
shill bidder's ID? If Seller X has a lot of offerings being scooped
up at the last minute by Buyer Z for prices significantly below the
BIN price, you might be looking at "rescue buys" made by the seller
because the legitimate bids were below the seller's expectations.
Also, I would think that if you've regularly been bidding against
individuals who share an interest in a certain type of item, you might
want to know their bidding patterns, and that knowledge can't be
complete without knowing who is getting the winning bids and who is
likely to drop out at what levels.
I doubt that many buyers are fanatic enough to do this very often, but
you did ask the question.
Bruce Remick
On Nov 6, 8:53 am, "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote:
> With coins, I don't believe it's the obligation of the
> educated to warn eBay bidders of a potential counterfeit.
It's not about moral obligation. It's about volenteerism, about users
helping users. No one is obligated to warn others about scam auctions.
But now those who would choose to can't. Warning eBay itself is
generally futile because in the vast majority of cases it doesn't read
messages sent to it but just sends back an automated response that
they received the message.
--------------------
If I got an email or eBay notice from someone telling me that the item I
was bidding on is bogus, I would have no idea of the credentials or motive
of the emailer and would probably ignore it. Volunteer warners might be
looked upon by some as anonymous busybodies. Like someone standing outside
a tobacco shop warning those who enter about the dangers of smoking, or
outside a McDonalds warning customers about transfats. Regardless of
whether submitting a formal complaint to eBay works or not, the complainer
can rest easy knowing he tried. Any efforts beyond that may not be
appreciated by an eBay bidder.
__________________
From its start the Internet has been about communication. Yahoo
Auctions failed in part because it prohibited users from
communicating. eBay has been gradually cutting back on user
communication, and now it has ended it. Its discussion boards are
useless here in that they're heavily censored. eBay, with no viable
competition, can pretty much do as it pleases.
________________
And so can the bidders who are attracted to eBay. If eBay adopts rules
that turn people off, those people are free to deal elsewhere. I don't see
eBay as all about communication, beyond what a seller includes in his
auction listing. Ebay chat rooms or discussion boards have little to do
with eBay auctions, and are mostly for those who like to share their
troubles with others.
Bruce Remick
"mazorj" <maz...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1YFQk.3278$Jv2....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Before eBay began to adopt rules to keep bidders ID's anonymous, I had
"competitive collector friends" who used to monitor my bidding to see if I
had stumbled upon something that they missed, rather than doing any
extensive searching on their own. Now they can't do that anymore. So with
that in mind, I'm for not disclosing the bidder ID's during an auction, or
even after. If I miss out on something with my last minute bid, I still
know I bid my max and don't really care if the high bidder was a shill or
not. The hidden bidder ID thing should not be a serious concern, from my
own viewpoint.
mazorj
That would be the reverse side of the "know thy competition" argument
and I can't blame you for taking that position. I'd probably say the
same thing if I had lazy leeches trailing me. Like the future price
of gold, this is one of those issues that can be validly debated with
good points on both sides, without ever reaching a consensus opinion.
note.boy
Impossible to spot repeat shill bid winners, preventing an item being sold
too cheaply to a genuine bidder. Billy
Nick Knight
>That would be the reverse side of the "know thy competition" argument and
>I can't blame you for taking that position. I'd probably say the same
>thing if I had lazy leeches trailing me. Like the future price of gold,
>this is one of those issues that can be validly debated with good points
>on both sides, without ever reaching a consensus opinion.
They've complicated the process, but I believe it can still be done.
Unfortunately, if you want to use eBay's API's to develop software, they
don't want you analyzing bidder ID's. Since I'm hoping to finish something
up by year's end and get eBay's blessing for it, I'd better not add this
feature to my software :). Perhaps a different utility after the first of
the year that DOESN'T make use of any of their services code.
I started a long story/survey awhile back but stopped short of posting it.
This is the wrong place to post it, too. Let me see if I can simplify the
query and get some preliminary input ... in another post.
Nick
Bruce Remick
"note.boy" <note...@naespamntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:moJQk.6803$Sf4....@newsfe15.ams2...
The bottom line is that if you lose an auction, regardless of who beats
you-- genuine or shill, you simply didn't bid high enough. But after
constantly getting outbid by ONE bid lately, I keep thinking how great it
would be if that one bidder had gotten sick or been away for the end of the
auction (assuming he didn't use a snipe program), I'd be the proud owner of
some attractive half cents today. I can live with it easier if several
people outbid me. But that one phantom bidder seems to be following me
around lately.
On eBay, one thing I have observed BTW, what with this gloomy economy, is
that higher grade copper coins (i.e. large & half cents) are still bringing
more than book. And more and more bidders are ignoring problems like
gouges, PVC, and old cleanings on these coppers and bidding as if they were
perfect. I wonder if that's because most copper collectors don't plan to
send their coins away to be graded by a TPG who might body-bag problem
coins.
Nick Knight
>Any efforts beyond that may not be appreciated by an eBay bidder.
Or, since we're guessing about it, he might very much appreciate it. Eh?
IMNSHO, it's his option, not some guy's on RCC who is the world's biggest
eBay happy camper.
Who needs to take the sender's word for it? If I was told something I had
just purchased was trouble, there are all sorts of options open to me. I
could even, um, find someone in-the-know to ask. I could google 'round and
see if I could find my own evidence. Or I could ignore it, and be happy or
sadly surprised years later.
I dunno. I'd prefer to decide for myself which route to follow, if I were
"him". Seems pretty obvious to me.
>If eBay adopts rules that turn people off, those people are free to deal elsewhere.
Or, of course, they are free to complain about it here, and later decide to
live with it or leave. Or simply complain about it here and make no other
decision. All sorts of options!
I'm pretty puzzled about eBay's path, myself. My employer went off the
honor system as far as "breaks" and lunches go some time back. For
developers, there is a time clock that was previously for in and out punches
only. A committe made a bunch of complicated rules offering 3 breaks a day
(including lunch). But you have to punch out and in for them under a list
of conditions. Ok.
Now there is a person who's job it is to fix all of the mistakes. Missed
punches. Too many punches. The payroll system guessing incorrectly about
which type of break it is. Wow. I understand the workload is overwhelming.
I'm betting the solution is causing more problems that the original problem!
But hey, it's the rules.
eBay has jumped through hoops claiming they are solving problems with second
chance offers. That probably isn't the case. I know I suggested doing away
with them instead, but 1-2 people claimed they've actually received at least
one and like the system. I've never seen one. Ok, so they are easy to
fake. Why not have the official eBay offers delivered ONLY via eBay's
internal message system? Or again, just do away with the silly practice
altogether.
Nick,
aka "k***n" (from memory)
Bruce Remick
"Nick Knight" <bhnc...@mr2ice.com> wrote in message
news:49138192$1$avpx$mr2...@news.east.cox.net...
> In <xgGQk.351$JW....@newsfe01.iad>, on 11/06/2008
> at 12:59 PM, "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> said:
>
>
>>Any efforts beyond that may not be appreciated by an eBay bidder.
>
> Or, since we're guessing about it, he might very much appreciate it. Eh?
> IMNSHO, it's his option, not some guy's on RCC who is the world's biggest
> eBay happy camper.
You jealous or something?
>
> Who needs to take the sender's word for it? If I was told something I had
> just purchased was trouble, there are all sorts of options open to me. I
> could even, um, find someone in-the-know to ask. I could google 'round
> and
> see if I could find my own evidence. Or I could ignore it, and be happy
> or
> sadly surprised years later.
So you're right back where you started.
>
> I dunno. I'd prefer to decide for myself which route to follow, if I were
> "him". Seems pretty obvious to me.
That's what makes this country so great.
>
>>If eBay adopts rules that turn people off, those people are free to deal
>>elsewhere.
>
> Or, of course, they are free to complain about it here, and later decide
> to
> live with it or leave. Or simply complain about it here and make no
> other
> decision. All sorts of options!
A few more of our freedoms! You sure are perceptive.
>
> I'm pretty puzzled about eBay's path, myself. My employer went off the
> honor system as far as "breaks" and lunches go some time back. For
> developers, there is a time clock that was previously for in and out
> punches
> only. A committe made a bunch of complicated rules offering 3 breaks a
> day
> (including lunch). But you have to punch out and in for them under a list
> of conditions. Ok.
>
> Now there is a person who's job it is to fix all of the mistakes. Missed
> punches. Too many punches. The payroll system guessing incorrectly about
> which type of break it is. Wow. I understand the workload is
> overwhelming.
> I'm betting the solution is causing more problems that the original
> problem!
> But hey, it's the rules.
I guess I missed your point with all this. But yes. Keeping up with Ebay
does get more and more complicated.
>
> eBay has jumped through hoops claiming they are solving problems with
> second
> chance offers. That probably isn't the case. I know I suggested doing
> away
> with them instead, but 1-2 people claimed they've actually received at
> least
> one and like the system. I've never seen one. Ok, so they are easy to
> fake. Why not have the official eBay offers delivered ONLY via eBay's
> internal message system? Or again, just do away with the silly practice
> altogether.
I've received several of them. Never a phoney. All have come via eBay's
internal message system. I would be suspicious of an 2nd chance offer from
outside of eBay. I was surprised by a couple of unexpected 2nd chance
offers and took the seller up on them. Paying one less increment than the
winning bidder works for me.
Nick Knight
>I guess I missed your point with all this.
But of course you did! It was too obvious and not inline with you narrow
always-pro-eBay thinking.
It was really pretty simple. I'm sure I see much head nodding in the crowd.
Nick
note.boy
If your statement is correct then why is shill bidding illegal, if a
legitimate bidder is outbid by a shill then it's their fault for not bidding
high enough??? Billy
RF
> The bottom line is that if you lose an auction, regardless of who
> beats you-- genuine or shill, you simply didn't bid high enough.
Which is why I snipe in the last 5 seconds.
I bid what I think a coin is worth to me.
If I win, fine.
If I lose, well another coin will come along.
Sniping also provides some (not much) protection against shills.
RF
> If your statement is correct then why is shill bidding illegal, if a
> legitimate bidder is outbid by a shill then it's their fault for not
> bidding high enough??? Billy
Please cite any source that prves shill bidding is illegal.
Bruce Remick
If shill bidding is illegal (I presume) on eBay, it is because eBay declared
it so. It's not the amount of the shill's bid as much as it is his tactics
and relationship with the seller. I suppose many shills & sellers have
become crafty enough that it's difficult to recognize and penalize them.
And yes, I still agree that if a legitimate bidder is outbid by a shill,
it's that bidder's fault for not bidding high enough. How could it be any
other way?
Bruce Remick
"RF" <R...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:gf1cn1$fjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
I still haven't become disciplined enough to place a last second bid and
then to accept it when the bid wasn't high enough. I am often tempted to
give it one more shot if there's enough time left. I doubt I'm alone there
from what I've experienced.
Bruce Remick
> In <iPOQk.42$4P5...@newsfe01.iad>, on 11/06/2008
> at 10:43 PM, "Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> said:
>
>>I guess I missed your point with all this.
>
> But of course you did! It was too obvious and not inline with you narrow
> always-pro-eBay thinking.
You're puzzled about eBay's path so you ramble off about your problems
taking breaks at work? Obvious to you, maybe. I do see that you're
disappointed that everyone doesn't share your negative attitude. You've
apparently got a problem with eBay and, rather than work it out or ignore
it, you think everyone else should hear about it. Your call.
>
> It was really pretty simple. I'm sure I see much head nodding in the
> crowd.
If so, it's likely coming from your crowd. Ask them.
note.boy
"RF" <R...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/11/ebay_auction_settlement/
Billy
RF
That doesn't specify what, if any, law was being violated.
Our AG is a loose cannon, determined to make a name for himself.
Nick Knight
>You're puzzled about eBay's path so you ramble off about your problems
>taking breaks at work? Obvious to you, maybe.
Bruce, you are so boring. Please? Did anyone else have problems following
the simple analogy? We'll discount the folks that will chime in simply
because they're nasty (I'll reference by killfile, again. You know who you
are :).
It was obvious to any normal thinking person, Bruce. Unless, of course, it
was inconvenient to be obvious, so as to give you a reason to whine for a
few more posts. Eh?
It might be a comprehensional issue. You didn't get the issue quite right
you're trying to rag on. Whatever, I made my case and you didn't get it.
Ok.
Nick