On 9/30/2010 4:05 PM, Richard wrote:Yeah!
On 9/30/2010 1:42 PM, Kent Rieger wrote:
FYI - so far so good.
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Stuart.R.Holland at
sce.com <mailto:Stuart.R.Holland at sce.com>
*To:* Kent Rieger <mailto:kent at world-solutions-inc.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:24 PM
*Subject:* Re: Fw: Fw: GMCStars on z/OS 1.12
So far, no abends. It only has a couple of days of continuous running.
It never made it through a full day before, though.
Stuart Holland
(626) 302-7209
PAX 27209
In article<201009301838.47738.pat at computer-refuge.org>,
Patrick Finnegan<pat at computer-refuge.org> writes:
I think you missed the point.
Nope.
The sniper was complaining that incremental bidders were driving up
the price and he wasn't getting his "good deal" by sniping. I say:
tough.
The gist of the thread was that the price was driven up if you put in
your "snipe" bid and allowed it to be chewed on by squirrels.
Increasing the bid on eBay requires two bidders, so if I leave out my
bid till the end, both of us (or all of us) simply throw our cards on
the table and the one with the highest bid wins.
I don't care if it happens that way, but I do not care to have anyone
make other bids knowing what I am willing to pay and that information is
visible as bids are made with your maximum amount out there (as in not
sniping).
If a shill puts in a bid, then has another shill chew up the action to
make it look interesting, that is unethical and illegal. I think some
sellers think that makes the less skilled bidders want to jump in.
Again sniping trumps that, as if they stop with a bid that
is lower than I was willing to pay, tough.
I agree with the others, I hate to see this and usually avoid items and
sellers who have this activity if at all possible. It usually means
other trouble post sale (non delivery, etc.)
Jim