Someone please explain the DIBS system here in the Classifieds/m2m (1 Viewer)

[upNdown]

Dibs is a stupid word.
Announcing dibs for somebody else is stupider.
But I do appreciate people announcing their intentions to buy, before PMing.
I remember no too long ago, somebody was selling multiple barrels of a chip that I wanted. One or two barrels were claimed by buyers. I said “I’ll take the rest” then immediately sent a PM. A while later, the seller replied to my PM, saying that they were all gone. It was disappointing because I had assumed that there were some left for me, and I was pretty excited about it.
So I like when sellers require people to reply first, then PM - it keeps everybody aware of what might be gone.
But the bottom line is that sellers can do whatever the fack they want.

 

[msuroo]

I think having a way to publicly document order of interest, especially at the speed at which things often sell here, is not the worst thing in the world, even though I personally am fine with a PM first (and would give deference to that). I honestly believe that most of the frustration comes from the fact that we often use the same word to for "I definitely want this right now" and "I am potentially interested if this ends up splitting, depending on when that is and at what price, etc". Most of the proverbial "releasing of dibs" happens in the latter, which of course makes sense as time passes and circumstances change.

 

[Josh Kifer]

One person does not get to define who is in front, behind, or beside them in the queue of sale. That's up to the seller. And for the purposes of at least this little part on the Internet, you can't enter into a contract on behalf of someone else without their knowledge or permission. Best just to tag them and let the chips proverbially and literally fall where they may.

If someone is willing to make the purchase for someone else, like I stated, they should be able to buy it. I have dibs for others intending to make the purchase myself if they didn't buy. It's capitalism. If I am willing to buy for someone else, then why does that change the queue of the sale.

My point was if they do dibs for someone else, I sent a PM to close the deal after no matter who the dibs was for. I notified the seller that they were for someone else, and if they pop up they can have them, but if they didn't I was happy to complete.

You ignored the fact in your comment that the individual dibsing for someone else was going to purchase to make the deal either way. It's a sale no matter what the "queue" you use is.

 

[Coyote]

Why do you think everything has to be clear in public?

My motivation to list chips for sale is to sell them. If someone simply pms me that they want to buy them, I'm fine with that.

Imagine posting in public that "I 'll buy them" only to be told that it's too late, while nobody ever knew.
It's poor form towards the buyers, unless it is NOT a "dibs" (first-come, first-served) sale.
All these procedural details should be stated by the seller to avoid unnecessary hard feelings.

 

[FordPickup92]

If someone is willing to make the purchase for someone else, like I stated, they should be able to buy it. I have dibs for others intending to make the purchase myself if they didn't buy. It's capitalism. If I am willing to buy for someone else, then why does that change the queue of the sale.

My point was if they do dibs for someone else, I sent a PM to close the deal after no matter who the dibs was for. I notified the seller that they were for someone else, and if they pop up they can have them, but if they didn't I was happy to complete.

You ignored the fact in your comment that the individual dibsing for someone else was going to purchase to make the deal either way. It's a sale no matter what the "queue" you use is.

I totally appreciated your dibs for the Carson nuggets. That was a solid since I was at work and didn't check the forum until later that day

 

[Tarheel4Life]

That's right it doesn't really do anything besides announce your intention to purchase it. But the idea there is that you should be following it up immediately with a PM with payment info. They should be essentially an atomic operation that takes two steps.

Calling dibs, and then trying to negotiate a better price, and then backing out is crap. Like saying that you want to ride shotgun and then realizing that the driver has terrible halitosis ... you can't back out

Anyone doing that isn’t trustworthy and should be publicly called out.

 

[Josh Kifer]

I totally appreciated your dibs for the Carson nuggets. That was a solid since I was at work and didn't check the forum until later that day

Yup. And if you didn't want them, which I knew you did, I would have bought and resold. But I was happy to do so to help ya out.

Any dibs without completing the deal with an immediate PM isn't a dibs. But if I have a sale and someone grabs something because they know someone else wants it and is willing to pay, I'm a seller, why the heck do I care as long as I'm paid. If I'm paid quickly and I'm just waiting 6-8 hours for an address, that's a win selling on here!

 

[FDLmold]

Dibs is horseshit. It's like calling shotgun while running to the car.

"Calling it" is for 6 year old kids looking for a car ride fight, designed basically to drive parents insane.

All my latest sales are "no dibs, I will sell what I want, in the quantity I want, to whom I want, when I want, so tell me what you want and I'll get back to you." It works well. People are free to call dibs, and I am free to ignore it that way. Or honor it.

 

[Tarheel4Life]

I’m relatively new here but the other problem with this system is putting something up for sale at 5:00 and someone PMs you commiting to buy at 5:01 and then someone posts this dibs things in the thread at 5:03. In this case I am selling to the person that PM’d me - they committed to buy first.

If someone posted the dibs thing at 5:01 and then someone else PMs me at 5:03 and the original dibs person PMs me at 5:05 I’m selling to the person that posted the dibs - they committed to buy first.

I do think there should be a site rule if they allow the dib marker thing that they have to post “Dibs - buying at the listed price” so there isn’t a lockup & negotiate type of thing going on. That’s really just wrong and makes it harder to sell (and buy) at a fairly negotiated price.

 

[upNdown]

There is no such thing as "releasing dibs." It's called "backing out on a deal" or "breaking your word" or "flaking out." In the olden days, they'd call you a welcher, but that's probably racist, I dunno.

 

[RichMahogany]

Sometimes friend’s will let me know of chips I want/need that get listed. Maybe I’m at work, jump on PCF and call dibs quickly to snag them. Might not be able to PM right away but damn sure I’ll let the seller know that I’ll PM when I get a minute or two

 

[Josh Kifer]

That's right it doesn't really do anything besides announce your intention to purchase it. But the idea there is that you should be following it up immediately with a PM with payment info. They should be essentially an atomic operation that takes two steps.

Calling dibs, and then trying to negotiate a better price, and then backing out is crap. Like saying that you want to ride shotgun and then realizing that the driver has terrible halitosis ... you can't back out

I've been shocked how much that has happened with me selling those cards. I had people do orders, I box them up, then I get "why don't we make it a even 20" instead of the 21.25 it is....

I had to go full Josh Kifer on the few times that happened.

 

[Josh Kifer]

There is no such thing as "releasing dibs." It's called "backing out on a deal" or "breaking your word" or "flaking out." In the olden days, they'd call you a welcher, but that's probably racist, I dunno.

Amen

 

[David O]

Years ago I used to call out dibs for someone I knew needed the chips. Now I just buy it for them if I know they really need them and they send me what I paid for them. I do not see why someone that really wants it would not just say "I'll take it" I usually post "mine" and follow up with a pm. This makes the dibs useless. Calling dibs for someone else just messes up the potential sales to other buyers.

I have see were people call dibs for someone and then that person does not want it. Then the seller has to make sure everyone knows that the item was not sold which stalls the sale.

You want it, say so and buy it. You know someone else wants it, tag them in the post or buy it for them if the price is right.

David

 

[DZPoker]

Imagine posting in public that "I 'll buy them" only to be told that it's too late, while nobody ever knew.
It's poor form towards the buyers, unless it is NOT a "dibs" (first-come, first-served) sale.
All these procedural details should be stated by the seller to avoid unnecessary hard feelings.

I get what you’re saying. It’s happened to me. But I’m not the one with chips to sell and I’m not actually the first one to contact the seller and say I will pay for them...so I’m ok with it. Sad, yes. Just like I’m sad when someone posts dibs first. But still ok with it?

Someone deciding to sell publicly does not mean someone else wants to buy publicly. If the seller is ok selling to the PM-only member because they contacted first, it’s their choice. If seller insist that buyer must be public with it, still their choice. Nothing is my choice though as the first person who posted ‘dibs’?

Just my thoughts...feel free to consider what you paid me for them when weighing their merits!

 

[Eloe2000]

A couple thoughts;

Sometimes a set or a lot is offered and someone only wants a piece of that lot/set. In that instance “dibs on X if split” makes sense because there isn’t a clear offer to sell just that portion or a price for that portion.

When something is being offered for sale publicly and we talk about this place as a community it makes sense that the transaction should be transparent for something heavily in demand. I have been the first to respond “I’ll take it” immediately followed by a PM only to get radio silence. Then others post “backup” shortly behind me. I get a message later saying “someone PMed me first”. Perhaps that did actually happen, but odds are it’s bullshit in many of those instances and they just sold it to someone else they are friendlier with. This is pretty disappointing stuff. They have the right to do that, but to the extent people want this to be an honest community and not just a collection of disparate cliques it makes sense for transactions to be transparent.

 

[Tarheel4Life]

.

A couple thoughts;

Sometimes a set or a lot is offered and someone only wants a piece of that lot/set. In that instance “dibs on X if split” makes sense because there isn’t a clear offer to sell just that portion or a price for that portion.

When something is being offered for sale publicly and we talk about this place as a community it makes sense that the transaction should be transparent for something heavily in demand. I have been the first to respond “I’ll take it” immediately followed by a PM only to get radio silence. Then others post “backup” shortly behind me. I get a message later saying “someone PMed me first”. Perhaps that did actually happen, but odds are it’s bullshit in many of those instances and they just sold it to someone else they are friendlier with. This is pretty disappointing stuff. They have the right to do that, but to the extent people want this to be an honest community and not just a collection of disparate cliques it makes sense for transactions to be transparent.

If it’s a community why wouldn’t you believe that someone got a PM first and sold based on that? That’s how it worked every other similar site I’ve ever been to.

 

[BonScot]

There is no such thing as "releasing dibs." It's called "backing out on a deal" or "breaking your word" or "flaking out." In the olden days, they'd call you a welcher, but that's probably racist, I dunno.

You dibsed you bought it. Simple.

 

[Eloe2000]

If it’s a community why wouldn’t you believe that someone got a PM first and sold based on that? That’s how it worked every other similar site I’ve ever been to.

My speed to respond. The timing of everyone else’s response to the public thread. The timing of their response. Also when you see who ended up with it in the mail thread and who had responded after you in the public thread.

 

[Josh Kifer]

You dibsed you bought it. Simple.

Don't tell me how to live my life!

 

[David O]

I will also add that sometimes the same people are on all of the time and others are not. Many people needing some specific chips lose out to those of us that are on quite a bit. This is one reason I like auctions

 

[Josh Kifer]

This is one reason I like auctions

...... Gross.... I am so disappointed in you.....

 

[RichMahogany]

I’m relatively new here but the other problem with this system is putting something up for sale at 5:00 and someone PMs you commiting to buy at 5:01 and then someone posts this dibs things in the thread at 5:03. In this case I am selling to the person that PM’d me - they committed to buy first.

If someone posted the dibs thing at 5:01 and then someone else PMs me at 5:03 and the original dibs person PMs me at 5:05 I’m selling to the person that posted the dibs - they committed to buy first.

I do think there should be a site rule if they allow the dib marker thing that they have to post “Dibs - buying at the listed price” so there isn’t a lockup & negotiate type of thing going on. That’s really just wrong and m

A couple thoughts;

Sometimes a set or a lot is offered and someone only wants a piece of that lot/set. In that instance “dibs on X if split” makes sense because there isn’t a clear offer to sell just that portion or a price for that portion.

When something is being offered for sale publicly and we talk about this place as a community it makes sense that the transaction should be transparent for something heavily in demand. I have been the first to respond “I’ll take it” immediately followed by a PM only to get radio silence. Then others post “backup” shortly behind me. I get a message later saying “someone PMed me first”. Perhaps that did actually happen, but odds are it’s bullshit in many of those instances and they just sold it to someone else they are friendlier with. This is pretty disappointing stuff. They have the right to do that, but to the extent people want this to be an honest community and not just a collection of disparate cliques it makes sense for transactions to be transparent.

Although possible, I don’t imagine this happening often. If someone knew that a chipping friend wanted what they’re selling, more than likely they offered it privately first

 

[David O]

...... Gross.... I am so disappointed in you.....

Why would you say it is gross?

 

[Josh Kifer]

Why would you say it is gross?

I hate auctions, because I don't have the money to run with most of the chippers around here. Lol

 

[BonScot]

Don't tell me how to live my life!

Perish the thought...

 

[Chawks45]

I hate auctions, because I don't have the money to run with most of the chippers around here. Lol

You have Audrey, though, so you're forever #winning.

 

[Josh Kifer]

You have Audrey, though, so you're forever #winning.

Holla!!!

 

[Eloe2000]

Although possible, I don’t imagine this happening often. If someone knew that a chipping friend wanted what they’re selling, more than likely they offered it privately first

I respect your response and appreciate your optimism, but am surprised people doubt this. It has happened to me several times and it is very disappointing. And all I am saying is that they are friendlier with those people. As in they are other notable active members who they have probably done deals with before and engage in random conversation often in comments. They get several purchase dibs and just favor the one from the person they have dealt with more even if they were slightly behind someone else. I am a pretty strong optimist, and I am fairly confident this isn’t just cynicism speaking.

 

[Coyote]

Someone deciding to sell publicly does not mean someone else wants to buy publicly. If the seller is ok selling to the PM-only member because they contacted first, it’s their choice. If seller insist that buyer must be public with it, still their choice.

Whatever the procedural details, they should be made clear, if it's a public sale.
If some buyer wanted to remain anonymous, this could only be possible if the seller expressly said "I 'll sell to people who just PM me". Otherwise, it should not be possible, IMHO.

Anyway, too much ado about something (NOT nothing).
A funny Greek proverb comes to mind, in either buyer's or seller's position: "The whore would like to remain anonymous, but joy over her earnings won't let her".