GTAVercetti 0 #101 November 10, 2005 Quote Your post is destructive, not productive like the rest of this thread was. Nick oh, good one. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #102 November 10, 2005 Oh, nonsense. He hasn't just rectified an innocent "mistake". He was CAUGHT using vagueness and ambiguity in his original ad in a deliberate attempt to deceive and mislead a newbie into purchasing the unit without realizing, until too late, that it had expired. I think I recognize an honest attempt at redemption when I see it, but I sure don't see it here. I don't think I'm alone in this opinion. As Kelel01 said above: Quote I'll put ALL my money on "asshat". I do not buy that he's innocent at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #103 November 10, 2005 QuoteQuoteYou're pathetic. Uh, diaplo... I'm no greenie but wtf was that??!? Take a breath man. Yeah, you're right. I was wrong in voicing that.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #104 November 10, 2005 Quoteoh, good one. Et tu, Brute' ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #105 November 10, 2005 No no, I think you're right. I don't think it was an "innocent mistake." But what we think on that matter is irrelevant. A mistake, it was. Caught him on it, we have. Corrected the listing, he has. All I'm saying is, throwing stones now will not accomplish anything positive. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #106 November 10, 2005 QuoteYeah, you're right. I was wrong in voicing that. Cheeky cheeky! My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #107 November 10, 2005 QuoteA mistake, it was. Caught him on it, we have. Corrected the listing, he has. Ah...taking lessons from Yoda, you are? QuoteAll I'm saying is, throwing stones now will not accomplish anything positive. Well, yes and no. I'm not dense to your point, but it pisses me off that he's still trying to make money off this. Since I obviously can't actually stake him to that anthill as I proposed, I still think he deserves some sanction for trying to screw a noob and potentially endangering your life and mine. I think we need to stick together and express zero tolerance for those who prey upon the skydiving community -- especially if, after having "learned their lesson" (yeah, right) they still try to salvage a profit out of it. OK, rant over. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #108 November 10, 2005 <> MMMMM yessss. Well, you can be pissed that somebody try and take advantage of someone else. That's what got me angry. Now he has listed it properly, knowing fully well that we are all watching. Had the listing just disapeared altogether, we would all be speculating as to where he went and whether or not he was trying to pull a fast one somewhere else. Now we all know that if this item is purchased, it is purchased by someone who will get what they are looking for. In my books, that was the best way the seller could have gone about rectifying his wrong doing. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #109 November 10, 2005 I say, all's well that ends well. He relisted it legitimately, the people who originally bid on it are no longer screwed, and we can all go on with our lives. And maybe he'll end up having to sell it for $30, when he could have just traded it in for $60 ($80?) or whatever it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #110 November 10, 2005 QuoteI say, all's well that ends well. He relisted it legitimately, the people who originally bid on it are no longer screwed, and we can all go on with our lives. Quote Saying that the 12 year old CYPRES "should not be packed" is not quite the same as "is illegal to use for skydiving in America." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #111 November 10, 2005 Yeah, I thought about that, too. Anvilbrother had mentioned earlier that there was a way to ask the question so that it's posted on the ad. ??? Is that possible? I couldn't find a way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #112 November 10, 2005 Actually, on second thought, that's pretty damn close to good enough. If someone sees that, it should at least trigger the thought that they should do some research. And I don't see a wife buying a present for her husband that "shouldn't be packed in a rig". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LawnDart21 0 #113 November 10, 2005 QuoteI still think he deserves some sanction for trying to screw a noob and potentially endangering your life and mine. I'm kind of fuzzy on that one. Even if it was sold to an unsuspecting buyer, a rigger would never install it in a container for them to jump it, so at worst, the buyer loses $100 or whatever amount of money they spent, but couldnt put it in a rig, how exactly does that threaten your life and mine? Edit to add, if the answer is: "What if a rigger installs it anyways?", then its the rigger, not the seller that is endangering lives, not the seller. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #114 November 10, 2005 Quote...."What if a rigger installs it anyways?", then its the rigger, not the seller that is endangering lives, not the seller. Except that it's the seller's "state of mind" that attaches guilt - at the very least, moral guilt - to his actions. I doubt he sold the expired Cypres realizing that a reputable rigger would decline to install it - I think he sold it, knowing that it was expired, yet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig, consciously choosing to ignore the risk to the buyer and other jumpers in the sky with the buyer if that device was jumped and prematurely fired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LawnDart21 0 #115 November 11, 2005 Quoteyet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig And you know this how? Your basing accusations on your assumptions. Sure I would agree that this seller acted inappropriately listing the unit the way he did, but I go back to your "he risked my life and yours" comment. He didnt risk anyones life. Your beef should be with the "disreputable" rigger you assume would install it. Which I would say is not a very likely event, as all the riggers I have ever met and worked with, tend to be the most reputable people in the sport. Be mad at the seller, thats cool, just be mad at the right offenses. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #116 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteyet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig And you know this how? Your basing accusations on your assumptions. Absolutely. From the overall context of all of the seller's conduct, I am making that assumption as to his state of mind. Given the circumstances, I'm sufficiently comfortable that my assumption is a reasonable one QuoteSure I would agree that this seller acted inappropriately listing the unit the way he did, but I go back to your "he risked my life and yours" comment. He didnt risk anyones life. Your beef should be with the "disreputable" rigger you assume would install it. Which I would say is not a very likely event, as all the riggers I have ever met and worked with, tend to be the most reputable people in the sport. Now that's a straw-man argument. I never said, or implied, that I "assume" any such thing about any riggers, or the rigging profession, which I hold in the highest regard, so please don't put words in my mouth. My beef is properly with the seller, who I am convinced (a) made a mistaken assumption that the Cypres would be installed in a rig (probably not even realizing that a rigger would reject it), and (b) made a conscious decision to ignore the risk to lives potentially presented by an expired AAD. An attempted offense is still an offense, if the person appreciates the wrongfulness of what he plans to do, and then affirmatively acts in furtherance of that plan. That's what happened here. Is it legally an attempted offense? -- it's a borderline case. Is it morally an attempted offense? Absolutely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LawnDart21 0 #117 November 11, 2005 QuoteAbsolutely. From the overall context of all of the seller's conduct, I am making that assumption as to his state of mind. I think the ad had like only 2 or 3 lines of text, which included the DOM. QuoteGiven the circumstances, I'm sufficiently comfortable that my assumption is a reasonable one Thats the scary part. QuoteNow that's a straw-man argument. I never said, or implied, that I "assume" any such thing about any riggers, or the rigging profession, which I hold in the highest regard, so please don't put words in my mouth. You absolutely implied that there is a possibility of a disreputable rigger installing the unit. Your statement that the seller "endangered your life and others" absolutely implies that there exists the possibility that the unit could be jumped expired, and the only way for that to happen, is if a rigger installs it and seals it in the US. By insinuating that this guy risked your safety and others, you are by default implying you believed that some rigger would install it in a rig, that is the only way for your "he endangered myself and others" statement to carry any credibility. Which goes back to my original counter point to your original statement, that while this seller may be shady, he certainly didn't endanger anyones life, as the unit would never end up in a container to be jumped. Lets look at it from this perspective, if the unit was sold, and if it was installed, and if it was jumped, and if it malfunctioned, who is responsible? Only one person, the rigger that would have had to install it and allowed the person to jump it. Does that mean that seller isnt a dick for selling someone an expired cyrpes unit that may not know any better? Nope, he'd be considered a dick in my book for that. But he (or she) is not endangering anyones life or limb by selling it. Its the responsibility of the rigger installing it to ensure its airworthy. And its the jumpers ultimate responsibility to understand how their own gear works. So I'll close with a question. If a rigger would simply not install the unit, and acknowledging that only a rigger can install the unit, then how is this seller (despite being shady for selling it in the first place expired) endangering anyones life and limb? -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #118 November 11, 2005 You know, I generally stay out of it when threads devolve into jousts over semantics, and though I realize I let myself get sucked into one this time, I have no more patience for it. I’ve said what I have to say, and I stand by my posts. Say what you want, think what you want - whatever. So unless there’s anything new and exiting in this thread to interest me, I’m moving on... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LawnDart21 0 #119 November 11, 2005 Quotejousts over semantics I'm not jousting, I legitimately would like to know how you consider a cypres unit that cannot be jumped, a threat to our lives? Quoteand potentially endangering your life and mine. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #120 November 11, 2005 I agree with Lawndart - this is more about ripping people off than putting them in danger. It's conceivable that it could get in the air, but at least 9 times out of 10 the buyer finds out he's been taken. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Scrumpot 1 #121 November 11, 2005 Quotebut at least 9 times out of 10 the buyer finds out he's been taken. Hopefully even a lot more than just that! 999 out of 1,000? 9,999 out of 10,000? Should be all 10, 1,000 or 10,000 actually. Real scenario: This arguably deceitful dickhead sells his expired Cypres to an unsuspecting buyer (the lady looking for her hubby's Christmas present for instance). That buyer (or gift recipient) then goes to have it installed in his rig by his rigger during his (her) next reserve repack. ...Damn straight they better find out right then & there that Cypres is EXPIRED & NOT AIRWORTHY! ANY rigger that would just install it otherwise in someone elses gear is not worthy to retain his ticket. If the buyer did not know what they were buying at time of purchase, they certainly should for sure now, at least at this point! Quotethis is more about ripping people off than putting them in danger. Should be anyway. coitus non circum - Moab Stone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #122 November 11, 2005 now if it did happen, I wonder who the majority of posters here would blame: 1) the rigger for not following regs 2) the jumper for not knowing better about his own gear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #123 November 11, 2005 Quotenow if it did happen, I wonder who the majority of posters here would blame: 1) the rigger for not following regs 2) the jumper for not knowing better about his own gear. The only person to blame would be the rigger who installed it. Of course, blame does no good if the cypres fires in the plane on jump run and takes the whole plane down. Hopefully, we prevented someone naive from purchasing the unit and wasting their money. I think thats the most important issue here. I don't see anything wrong with watching out for one another. At least thats what skydiving used to be about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #124 November 11, 2005 I have a car that has a fair likelihood of crashing and exploding the next time someone applies the brakes. I think I'll sell it on ebay with the description "Looks and drives like new!" I'm not going to actually say it STOPS like new. But this isn't a safety issue. After all, the new owner can be expected to have it inspected, right? If they just blew themselves up, it would be their fault, not mine, right? First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #125 November 11, 2005 QuoteAfter all, the new owner can be expected to have it inspected, right? If they just blew themselves up, it would be their fault, not mine, right? I'd say yes. Buy a car and not get it inspected? That's a screw up. Buy a car on EBay and not get it inspected? Even worse. But just because it's their fault they screwed up in the purchase, in no way diminishes your misleading sales and lack of integrity. The 'right' thing to do is full disclosure. People are required to do the legal thing only. The right thing isn't always equal to the legal thing. Where do we draw the line between babysitting each other and just expecting people to be responsible for themselves? (in other words I'd never do what the cypres seller did, but I'm not ready to throw stones at him in judgement, either. But I do applaud warning others about his misleading ad - I'd do it myself, just not get all self righteous about it. Do we really need to get all worked up about it to get motivated to write a few e-mails?) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 5 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
kelel01 1 #111 November 10, 2005 Yeah, I thought about that, too. Anvilbrother had mentioned earlier that there was a way to ask the question so that it's posted on the ad. ??? Is that possible? I couldn't find a way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #112 November 10, 2005 Actually, on second thought, that's pretty damn close to good enough. If someone sees that, it should at least trigger the thought that they should do some research. And I don't see a wife buying a present for her husband that "shouldn't be packed in a rig". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawnDart21 0 #113 November 10, 2005 QuoteI still think he deserves some sanction for trying to screw a noob and potentially endangering your life and mine. I'm kind of fuzzy on that one. Even if it was sold to an unsuspecting buyer, a rigger would never install it in a container for them to jump it, so at worst, the buyer loses $100 or whatever amount of money they spent, but couldnt put it in a rig, how exactly does that threaten your life and mine? Edit to add, if the answer is: "What if a rigger installs it anyways?", then its the rigger, not the seller that is endangering lives, not the seller. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #114 November 10, 2005 Quote...."What if a rigger installs it anyways?", then its the rigger, not the seller that is endangering lives, not the seller. Except that it's the seller's "state of mind" that attaches guilt - at the very least, moral guilt - to his actions. I doubt he sold the expired Cypres realizing that a reputable rigger would decline to install it - I think he sold it, knowing that it was expired, yet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig, consciously choosing to ignore the risk to the buyer and other jumpers in the sky with the buyer if that device was jumped and prematurely fired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawnDart21 0 #115 November 11, 2005 Quoteyet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig And you know this how? Your basing accusations on your assumptions. Sure I would agree that this seller acted inappropriately listing the unit the way he did, but I go back to your "he risked my life and yours" comment. He didnt risk anyones life. Your beef should be with the "disreputable" rigger you assume would install it. Which I would say is not a very likely event, as all the riggers I have ever met and worked with, tend to be the most reputable people in the sport. Be mad at the seller, thats cool, just be mad at the right offenses. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #116 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteyet fully presuming that it would be installed on an unsuspecting buyer's rig And you know this how? Your basing accusations on your assumptions. Absolutely. From the overall context of all of the seller's conduct, I am making that assumption as to his state of mind. Given the circumstances, I'm sufficiently comfortable that my assumption is a reasonable one QuoteSure I would agree that this seller acted inappropriately listing the unit the way he did, but I go back to your "he risked my life and yours" comment. He didnt risk anyones life. Your beef should be with the "disreputable" rigger you assume would install it. Which I would say is not a very likely event, as all the riggers I have ever met and worked with, tend to be the most reputable people in the sport. Now that's a straw-man argument. I never said, or implied, that I "assume" any such thing about any riggers, or the rigging profession, which I hold in the highest regard, so please don't put words in my mouth. My beef is properly with the seller, who I am convinced (a) made a mistaken assumption that the Cypres would be installed in a rig (probably not even realizing that a rigger would reject it), and (b) made a conscious decision to ignore the risk to lives potentially presented by an expired AAD. An attempted offense is still an offense, if the person appreciates the wrongfulness of what he plans to do, and then affirmatively acts in furtherance of that plan. That's what happened here. Is it legally an attempted offense? -- it's a borderline case. Is it morally an attempted offense? Absolutely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawnDart21 0 #117 November 11, 2005 QuoteAbsolutely. From the overall context of all of the seller's conduct, I am making that assumption as to his state of mind. I think the ad had like only 2 or 3 lines of text, which included the DOM. QuoteGiven the circumstances, I'm sufficiently comfortable that my assumption is a reasonable one Thats the scary part. QuoteNow that's a straw-man argument. I never said, or implied, that I "assume" any such thing about any riggers, or the rigging profession, which I hold in the highest regard, so please don't put words in my mouth. You absolutely implied that there is a possibility of a disreputable rigger installing the unit. Your statement that the seller "endangered your life and others" absolutely implies that there exists the possibility that the unit could be jumped expired, and the only way for that to happen, is if a rigger installs it and seals it in the US. By insinuating that this guy risked your safety and others, you are by default implying you believed that some rigger would install it in a rig, that is the only way for your "he endangered myself and others" statement to carry any credibility. Which goes back to my original counter point to your original statement, that while this seller may be shady, he certainly didn't endanger anyones life, as the unit would never end up in a container to be jumped. Lets look at it from this perspective, if the unit was sold, and if it was installed, and if it was jumped, and if it malfunctioned, who is responsible? Only one person, the rigger that would have had to install it and allowed the person to jump it. Does that mean that seller isnt a dick for selling someone an expired cyrpes unit that may not know any better? Nope, he'd be considered a dick in my book for that. But he (or she) is not endangering anyones life or limb by selling it. Its the responsibility of the rigger installing it to ensure its airworthy. And its the jumpers ultimate responsibility to understand how their own gear works. So I'll close with a question. If a rigger would simply not install the unit, and acknowledging that only a rigger can install the unit, then how is this seller (despite being shady for selling it in the first place expired) endangering anyones life and limb? -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #118 November 11, 2005 You know, I generally stay out of it when threads devolve into jousts over semantics, and though I realize I let myself get sucked into one this time, I have no more patience for it. I’ve said what I have to say, and I stand by my posts. Say what you want, think what you want - whatever. So unless there’s anything new and exiting in this thread to interest me, I’m moving on... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LawnDart21 0 #119 November 11, 2005 Quotejousts over semantics I'm not jousting, I legitimately would like to know how you consider a cypres unit that cannot be jumped, a threat to our lives? Quoteand potentially endangering your life and mine. -- My other ride is a RESERVE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #120 November 11, 2005 I agree with Lawndart - this is more about ripping people off than putting them in danger. It's conceivable that it could get in the air, but at least 9 times out of 10 the buyer finds out he's been taken. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrumpot 1 #121 November 11, 2005 Quotebut at least 9 times out of 10 the buyer finds out he's been taken. Hopefully even a lot more than just that! 999 out of 1,000? 9,999 out of 10,000? Should be all 10, 1,000 or 10,000 actually. Real scenario: This arguably deceitful dickhead sells his expired Cypres to an unsuspecting buyer (the lady looking for her hubby's Christmas present for instance). That buyer (or gift recipient) then goes to have it installed in his rig by his rigger during his (her) next reserve repack. ...Damn straight they better find out right then & there that Cypres is EXPIRED & NOT AIRWORTHY! ANY rigger that would just install it otherwise in someone elses gear is not worthy to retain his ticket. If the buyer did not know what they were buying at time of purchase, they certainly should for sure now, at least at this point! Quotethis is more about ripping people off than putting them in danger. Should be anyway. coitus non circum - Moab Stone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #122 November 11, 2005 now if it did happen, I wonder who the majority of posters here would blame: 1) the rigger for not following regs 2) the jumper for not knowing better about his own gear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #123 November 11, 2005 Quotenow if it did happen, I wonder who the majority of posters here would blame: 1) the rigger for not following regs 2) the jumper for not knowing better about his own gear. The only person to blame would be the rigger who installed it. Of course, blame does no good if the cypres fires in the plane on jump run and takes the whole plane down. Hopefully, we prevented someone naive from purchasing the unit and wasting their money. I think thats the most important issue here. I don't see anything wrong with watching out for one another. At least thats what skydiving used to be about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #124 November 11, 2005 I have a car that has a fair likelihood of crashing and exploding the next time someone applies the brakes. I think I'll sell it on ebay with the description "Looks and drives like new!" I'm not going to actually say it STOPS like new. But this isn't a safety issue. After all, the new owner can be expected to have it inspected, right? If they just blew themselves up, it would be their fault, not mine, right? First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #125 November 11, 2005 QuoteAfter all, the new owner can be expected to have it inspected, right? If they just blew themselves up, it would be their fault, not mine, right? I'd say yes. Buy a car and not get it inspected? That's a screw up. Buy a car on EBay and not get it inspected? Even worse. But just because it's their fault they screwed up in the purchase, in no way diminishes your misleading sales and lack of integrity. The 'right' thing to do is full disclosure. People are required to do the legal thing only. The right thing isn't always equal to the legal thing. Where do we draw the line between babysitting each other and just expecting people to be responsible for themselves? (in other words I'd never do what the cypres seller did, but I'm not ready to throw stones at him in judgement, either. But I do applaud warning others about his misleading ad - I'd do it myself, just not get all self righteous about it. Do we really need to get all worked up about it to get motivated to write a few e-mails?) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
