Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Tarptent Squall 2
Display Avatars Sort By:
Casey Bowden
(clbowden) - MLife

Locale: Berkeley Hills
Re: Re: Re: Dead Horse on 02/17/2010 16:26:43 MST Print View

I propose that everyone ignore Ben's messages until he posts his 'around the world' trip report.

Jeffs Eleven
(WoodenWizard) - F

Locale: Greater Mt Tabor
Konrad on 02/17/2010 16:27:59 MST Print View

Page 7, Baby!

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Re: Konrad on 02/17/2010 16:29:44 MST Print View

Do I add to the insanity?

Oops. I think I just did.

Speaking of that "round the world" trip, I think I was just beginning to browse these forums when I first read about that.

Edited by T.L. on 02/17/2010 16:30:37 MST.

(onthecouchagain) - MLife

Locale: Sunny SoCal
I know just what to do on 02/17/2010 16:30:40 MST Print View

Hey Ben,

Let's let this post it should by now and go fry up that catfish you still owe me (unless you sold it to a higher bidder) and have some brew??? game?


Darin Kizer
(dkizer) - F

Locale: New England
Re: BPL could learn from this on 02/17/2010 17:37:42 MST Print View

actually second to PM

Richard Scruggs
(JRScruggs) - MLife

Locale: Oregon
Re: Re: Tarptent Squall 2 on 02/17/2010 17:43:45 MST Print View

Very interesting thread . . . most especially for future caution in posting something for sale at BPL.

Not to beat the horse, but a few comments since I've not yet tossed in two cents and we are shooting for 8 pages, or maybe even more:

First, as to Moderator Rick's statement that, "I think it likewise important to point out that under contract law, a contract does not exist until there is 1. an offer to purchase (or trade or...) and 2. the offer is accepted. Sellers are not legally bound to accept any offer, whether the first or the twentieth."

I differ with Rick's formulation that a contract can be formed only when a seller accepts an offer to buy. I believe that a simple offer to sell that is followed by a clear acceptance of that offer, with no event or change of circumstances intervening to affect the terms of that offer, would create an contract.

The result described by Rick occurs if the seller clearly states that the proposed sale is a solicitation of offers to buy and that the seller will accept an offer (to buy) that the seller considers to be satisfactory.

In the latter situation (seller's solicitation of offers to buy), I agree the seller retains control of whether and with whom a contract is created. But with just an offer to sell, the seller should be bound by the first to accept.

Second comment: Any item I might post for sale in the future through BPL would likely include some kind of statement making clear how the "sale" will be detemined to have occurred, maybe something like the following:

"This item will be sold to the first person who posts to this thread an unconditional acceptance of all the terms offered above. Personal messages requesting more info are welcome, but no personal message will qualify as an acceptance of this offer."

In this situation, seems there was a simple offer to sell, and an unequivocal acceptance of that offer.

End of story.

If something came up between the offer and the acceptance, might be different. But from the first three postings to this thread, doesn't seem like anything affected the offer (post #1) and its acceptance (post #2). Poster #3 did no more than inject an entirely new offer to buy something that Poster #2 no longer had the right to sell because he had already sold it upon Poster #2's acceptance. Maybe #3 should have made his offer to the new owner, Poster #2.

Might be a dead horse, but this dead horse shouldn't go to waste as a learning experience for future gear swaps.

Best thing about BPL swaps is that, regardless of "right" or "wrong" in this instance or others, folks for the most part just do to others like they would like to have done to themselves -- or even more so. Lot of nice folks here.

Edited by JRScruggs on 02/17/2010 17:52:28 MST.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Clarity on 02/17/2010 18:14:20 MST Print View

"9. I start thinking well i want the tent but it is more important to me to have respect for the forum and its members like garry. hence im at a loss for what to do"

Listen to your inner voice and act accordingly. That is far more important than what other people think. My guess is, if you do, you will have respected the forum and the community, others' respect for you will grow, and, most importantly, you will maintain your SELF respect.

Konrad .
(Konrad1013) - MLife
Oh Boy Law school time!!! on 02/17/2010 18:16:23 MST Print View

Hey Richard, i gotta chime in as well. Its been a couple years since i took basic federal contract law, but as I recall, I think you and Rick are both partially right. If a seller comes up to YOU, and specifically you, and offers you something, then that becomes an offer (assuming all other the requirements of an offer are met). If you accept, then its a done deal. So If i were to say "Richard, I want to sell you my 30 tarptents for $10" and you say "awesome!!!, I'll take it"... then If i dont fulfill my end of the deal, you have a claim against me.

However, I believe what goes on in these gear swap forums, is actually called an "invitation to treat" The seller isn't directing his goods to anyone in specific, so its not really an offer persay. When you tell him that you want it, you, the buyer, becomes the offeror, and the seller can accept or not. From Wikipedia, under Invitation to Treat

"A shop owner displaying their goods for sale is generally making an invitation to treat (Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1953] 1 QB 401). They are not obliged to sell the goods to anyone who is willing to pay for them, even if additional signage such as "special offer" accompanies the display of the goods. (But see bait and switch.) This distinction was legally relevant in Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394, where it was held that displaying a flicknife for sale in a shop did not contravene legislation which prohibited offering for sale such a weapon. The distinction also means that if a shop mistakenly displays an item for sale at a very low price it is not obliged to sell it for that amount [1]." Generally, advertisements are invitations to treat, so the person advertising is not compelled to sell to every customer. In Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204, it was held that where the appellant advertised to sell wild birds, was not offering to sell them. Lord Parker CJ commented that it did not make "business sense" for advertisements to be offers, as the person making the advertisement may find himself in a situation where he would be contractually obliged to sell more goods than he actually owned."

I am not an attorney, but it appears to me that sellers on this forum are more like the store owners mentioned in the case law. Either way, I hope no one is arguing contract law, and small claims when it comes down to gear

Edited by Konrad1013 on 02/17/2010 18:28:55 MST.

R Alsborg
(FastWalker) - MLife

Locale: Southwest
Re: Oh Boy Law school time!!! on 02/17/2010 18:34:25 MST Print View

Next Case....

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Oh Boy Law school time!!! on 02/17/2010 18:45:01 MST Print View

"Invitation to Treat"

I accept all invitations to treat. I, of course, do the right thing by at first protesting (no no, I'll pay for my part of the meal...), but as is custom, I only make that protestation once. If you still want to treat, I'm all for it!

Tony Fleming
(TonyFleming) - MLife

Locale: Midwest
Don't say it on 02/17/2010 19:11:31 MST Print View

Every day I come home from work, hop on my beloved BPL only to see all of the great gear I missed out on (It's very frustrating). I would love it if some of you would leave your gear out there for 24 hours to go to the highest bidder. You would receive more money to make your next gear purchase and Ben, Jonathan, and Dave wouldn't end up with all of the best gear being posted :) (GG LT4's for example - I didn't even get a catfish)

What would they do with their time :)


Edited by TonyFleming on 02/17/2010 19:24:32 MST.

JR Redding
(GrinchMT) - F
Re: on 02/17/2010 19:13:21 MST Print View

No it didn't and I am not the one trying to tell someone else they were wrong for buying a freaking tent or making them feel guilty because they bought the tent. You people created this huge mess and it wasn't even you're sale. It should have been left between the seller and the two buyers, period. It had absolutely nothing to do with you but appears you had fun beating up the person who paid for and received the tent and then creating a troll thread about how BPL will turn into ebay.

This is the kind of stuff that goes on at Backpacker and if you want to do that, maybe you should stick to posting over there instead of berating people here for an issue that didn't involve you in the first place.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: Re: on 02/17/2010 19:19:45 MST Print View

I completely disagree with Joe's raving rant.

Both Garry and Vadim asked publically for opinions! Joe is barking up the wrong tree. Maybe he should just click somewhere else if he finds this thread upsetting.

JR Redding
(GrinchMT) - F
Re on 02/17/2010 19:25:15 MST Print View

An opinion is a singular response. Not a continual posting on who has the correct morals according to your idea of morality.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: on 02/17/2010 19:39:20 MST Print View

That's your opinion.

Edited by ben2world on 02/17/2010 19:39:51 MST.

Dave -
(FamilyGuy) - F

Locale: Up there
Tarptent Squall 2 on 02/17/2010 20:21:51 MST Print View

You two should go hiking. Together.

garry pollard
(pollardg) - F

Locale: SF east bay
Re: Re: on 02/17/2010 20:24:03 MST Print View


Guys I have been in contact with Vadim and while he feels bad he still wants the tent. So I have told him to keep it and I will wait and look for another. I am sorry this topic got so dragged out but I hope it gave us all an appreciation for the great site we have. I hope it continues. Thanks to all who opined for and against each of us.

You guys are great and if anyone has a Squall 2 or similar that they want to sell (in a non bid arena) let me know.

Thanks and I hope this ends this thread (not that I have control over this) If anyone want to add just PM me.


shawn weld
(Spoon) - F

Locale: NorthEast
NOT the Final Post!!! on 02/18/2010 17:45:18 MST Print View

Sadly...Garry has guilted Vadim into sending him the tent and wants to make sure I don't "stiff" Vadim out of the $20.00. So I guess what you post on the wall doesn't count after all. Ethics? Whatever buddy...enjoy your tent.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: NOT the Final Post!!! on 02/18/2010 18:29:02 MST Print View

The 'dead' horse that won't die...

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Re: Re: NOT the Final Post!!! on 02/18/2010 18:34:26 MST Print View

Well, we have to get to 10 pages somehow. Konrad is counting on us.