Ethics and Paypal

[RockMyAmadeus]

Oh, and for the record...the person who posted this:

 

The reason is because he is a tool. And for the record, his long standing status is on the comics forum. I don't even think he collects coins.

 

Hey RMA, gonna call me out for my rules violation or do something productive, like get a life.

 

I don't know who this person is (other than their user id), but unprovoked lashing out at strangers on the internet...while a time honored tradition...isn't really the best way to build up any respect or credibility. You can disagree with someone without being hostile and insulting, especially unprovoked.

 

It's kinda funny....I get all sorts of grief on the comics side for being a dedicated coinee...and here, there are people claiming I don't even collect them. Ironic, no?

 

I'm sorry life has dealt you a tough set of cards. Best of luck to you.

 

I don't need to build up respect or credibility on this or any other coin forum. If you were actually a coin collector like you pretend to be, you would know this. Furthermore, we don't need to be lectured on the subject of ethics by a forum troll.

 

You want us to believe that you collect coins. Then start posting some coins and discussing coins and stop being the Paypal police. Nobody cares if Paypal doesn't get their fee.

 

Btw, do you really expect us to believe that you motive for posting this thread was to clarify to the point that you beat like a red headed step child in the thread that got zapped? Your such a good little troll. Post the thread and act like you motive is innocent. Then when it appears that everyone is fooled, you reveal your true agenda which was to respond to my slam which you couldn't do on the other thread since it got zapped. Of course, now you will deny it, while using 5 consecutive posts to do so all while trying to ruin my credibility in process.

 

We all know what you are, you aren't fooling anyone! Now go after that post count title.

 

I'm sorry, truly, that life has dealt you such a difficult set of cards that you have to lash out unprovoked at people like this. Truly. You're clearly not a happy person.

 

I don't know you, or anything about you, but you're clearly angry about something, and since you and I have never interacted, it's clearly not me.

 

That said, you're not the board spokesman, you don't speak for anyone but yourself, and what you choose to believe is none of my business, no matter how untrue it may be.

 

The fact remains: using Paypal personal to pay for merchandise is theft. To those who were inclined to steal before, this means nothing: you will continue to steal, because the problem is much deeper with you than what Paypal does. And, you will continue to scoff at anyone who stands up to theft. But you won't be able to do it in broad daylight.

 

Those who did not know, and who were not inclined to steal, probably welcome this information, as I did, so they could address it.

 

Best wishes to you.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Spoon paypal. If someone offered to send me something as a gift, I can care less. I've even offered it to avoid fees. Stick up for them all you want & call me a thief. Who cares...they get theirs in the end.

 

I'm such a bad person...

 

 

:shrug:

 

At least you're honest about it, and people know where you're coming from.

 

The problem with telling the world you're a thief is that it might damage your ability to do business with anyone. After all...you just announced that you have no problem with stealing.

[James_OldeTowne]

After all...if one chooses to use Paypal, that's their choice. There are always other choices.

There may be other choices, but are the "other choices" given equal footing? Most very definitely... NOT. EBay clearly gives enormous preference for Paypal, and it is precisely this arrangement which I consider to be "corruption". Therefore, as I posted above, I do not use Paypal. I try as hard as possible not to use eBay, and only use it when directed there by others. I NEVER jump on eBay to buy things of my own accord.

 

That's right...Paypal, which is owned by eBay, clearly is favored. But it's still not the only choice, and doesn't have anything to do with board transactions.

 

I liken it to the grape example at the store. If I pop a grape in my mouth offhandedly, not thinking about it, not intending to steal from the store....I've still taken something without paying for it. It's still stealing, even if I'm completely unaware.

Oddly enough, the grocery stores I frequent always have open bags of grapes for sampling, and I partake of that without a second thought of "stealing".

 

James. I know you know the difference between samples given away by the store (since it owns the grapes) and just taking some without their ok.

 

If I use the bathroom at the grocery store, am I stealing water, electricity and toilet paper?

 

Moot. They are offered as a service to customers. They are provided by the facility for precisely that purpose.

 

If I read part of a book at Barnes & Noble and decide not to buy it, is that stealing?

 

It depends. What are Barnes & Noble's terms?

 

These are different scenarios than the one you presented, but all are part of a "grey area" at the bounds of theft, and in the case of Paypal, I will probably never err on the part of accusations of stealing, just because of the corruption I see there.

 

Sorry, James. There's no "grey area" here. Using Paypal for merchandise is clearly defined in their terms as not allowed. Therefore, doing it is theft. Black and white.

 

If Paypal and eBay -- either one or both -- closed up shop forever, I would not miss them at all.

 

Neither would I. I would probably dance for joy for months. But that doesn't alter the fact that using personal payment for merchandise is theft.

 

American jurisprudence...and the English Common Law upon which it is based...does NOT allow for violating a company's terms and stealing from them just because one doesn't like the way a company is run.

Based upon the tone and content of your responses, then, I do not believe that your original question has anything to do with "ethics" (the title of the thread is "Ethics and Paypal"). I think what you are really asking is "legal standards and Paypal", because that is really all you are talking about.

 

None of the scenarios I see posted above illustrate any useful parameters for judging whether or not someone is an "ethical person", because whenever something is "black and white", then you automatically remove any possibility of an ethical discussion. This is because by definition, ethics comes into play when things are NOT "black and white". Ethics is what guides ones behavior when given flexibility within a set of parameters, but you are removing any sense of flexibility whatsoever.

 

Therefore, I think it is a little misleading the way you indicated this as a discussion of "ethics" !

 

I sometimes turn right on red without coming to a full stop. I sometimes roll through stop signs at 4:30 am. I sometimes dash across the street outside the walking zones. I probably have sold something in my lifetime for money that should have been reported to the IRS. Do any of these actions make me "unethical"? I doubt it. There is a difference between breaking the rules, and behaving in an unethical manner.

[RockMyAmadeus]

After all...if one chooses to use Paypal, that's their choice. There are always other choices.

There may be other choices, but are the "other choices" given equal footing? Most very definitely... NOT. EBay clearly gives enormous preference for Paypal, and it is precisely this arrangement which I consider to be "corruption". Therefore, as I posted above, I do not use Paypal. I try as hard as possible not to use eBay, and only use it when directed there by others. I NEVER jump on eBay to buy things of my own accord.

 

That's right...Paypal, which is owned by eBay, clearly is favored. But it's still not the only choice, and doesn't have anything to do with board transactions.

 

I liken it to the grape example at the store. If I pop a grape in my mouth offhandedly, not thinking about it, not intending to steal from the store....I've still taken something without paying for it. It's still stealing, even if I'm completely unaware.

Oddly enough, the grocery stores I frequent always have open bags of grapes for sampling, and I partake of that without a second thought of "stealing".

 

James. I know you know the difference between samples given away by the store (since it owns the grapes) and just taking some without their ok.

 

If I use the bathroom at the grocery store, am I stealing water, electricity and toilet paper?

 

Moot. They are offered as a service to customers. They are provided by the facility for precisely that purpose.

 

If I read part of a book at Barnes & Noble and decide not to buy it, is that stealing?

 

It depends. What are Barnes & Noble's terms?

 

These are different scenarios than the one you presented, but all are part of a "grey area" at the bounds of theft, and in the case of Paypal, I will probably never err on the part of accusations of stealing, just because of the corruption I see there.

 

Sorry, James. There's no "grey area" here. Using Paypal for merchandise is clearly defined in their terms as not allowed. Therefore, doing it is theft. Black and white.

 

If Paypal and eBay -- either one or both -- closed up shop forever, I would not miss them at all.

 

Neither would I. I would probably dance for joy for months. But that doesn't alter the fact that using personal payment for merchandise is theft.

 

American jurisprudence...and the English Common Law upon which it is based...does NOT allow for violating a company's terms and stealing from them just because one doesn't like the way a company is run.

Based upon the tone and content of your responses, then, I do not believe that your original question has anything to do with "ethics" (the title of the thread is "Ethics and Paypal"). I think what you are really asking is "legal standards and Paypal", because that is really all you are talking about.

 

None of the scenarios I see posted above illustrate any useful parameters for judging whether or not someone is an "ethical person", because whenever something is "black and white", then you automatically remove any possibility of an ethical discussion. This is because by definition, ethics comes into play when things are NOT "black and white". Ethics is what guides ones behavior when given flexibility within a set of parameters, but you are removing any sense of flexibility whatsoever.

 

Therefore, I think it is a little misleading the way you indicated this as a discussion of "ethics" !

 

I sometimes turn right on red without coming to a full stop. I sometimes roll through stop signs at 4:30 am. I sometimes dash across the street outside the walking zones. I probably have sold something in my lifetime for money that should have been reported to the IRS. Do any of these actions make me "unethical"? I doubt it. There is a difference between breaking the rules, and behaving in an unethical manner.

 

I was specifically referring to the ethics of how one conducts themselves with Paypal, not the ethics of Paypal itself. It very much has to do with ethics, personal ethics as well as societal, capital "E" Ethics.. The discussion is not, and never has been, about what Paypal may do legally, but rather what someone who uses Paypal's services should do ethically. What Paypal can legally do, and the ethics therein, are an entirely different thread.

 

My apologies for any confusion.

 

But equating infractions like rolling through a stop sign at 4:30 AM with actual stealing...... Sorry, but there is no flexibility with this issue. Paypal says "this is our service, and we therefore have the right to set the terms of use for that service, and one of those terms is that you cannot use the fee-free personal payment option to purchase merchandise."

 

Choosing, therefore, to do so is stealing. No grey. Black and white.

 

And we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of the word "ethics." "Ethics" is the system of rules by which a society governs itself, not what someone does when the issue isn't black and white. In Western ethical standards, stealing is wrong, always, because it unjustly deprives another of that which they possess or have a right to.

[gmarguli]

Using Paypal gift for a business transaction is stealing. It's no different than watching a TV show and not watching the commercials which is stealing the entertainment from the show.

 

There is no agreement with the tv networks that you are required to watch the commercials.

[johnny9434]

im wondering when paypuke is going to start taking money from the buyers as well? or are they already doing that?

[newprepper]

Ethics quite simply is "Doing the right thing when nobody is watching"

[RWB]

If the OP will examine closely, he will find that the PayFriend model for revenue is similar to that used by commercial hospital and medical service holding companies. Each layer begs a profit, even if they provide nothing of value. This is the 1930s electrical holding company approach that was shut down in the Roosevelt administration. Lessons learned by the greedy.

[FishyOne]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

[RockMyAmadeus]

If the OP will examine closely, he will find that the PayFriend model for revenue is similar to that used by commercial hospital and medical service holding companies. Each layer begs a profit, even if they provide nothing of value. This is the 1930s electrical holding company approach that was shut down in the Roosevelt administration. Lessons learned by the greedy.

 

Hi Roger.

 

Regardless of the legality...or potential change in legality...of Paypal's terms, the fact remains that they don't allow Gift to be used for merchandise payments, and doing so is theft. Paypal says "this is our service, we set the rules for our service, just like anyone does, and we say no." Flouting that, then, is stealing.

 

And it's not really all that similar...Paypal actually does SOMETHING.

 

The answer, if one doesn't like Paypal's business model, is to not use them. The answer is NOT steal from them.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

[James_OldeTowne]

I was specifically referring to the ethics of how one conducts themselves with Paypal, not the ethics of Paypal itself.

So was I ! And again, I do not believe that violating Paypal's rule (and I have not read the rule -- just the "spirit of the rule" from what you've posted) is a question of "ethics". Here's why:

 

Given the following:

 

Paypal says "this is our service, and we therefore have the right to set the terms of use for that service, and one of those terms is that you cannot use the fee-free personal payment option to purchase merchandise."

... something with this scenario does not make sense.

 

Paypal cannot be truthful in stating "you cannot use the fee-free personal payment option to purchase merchandise", because evidently, YOU CAN INDEED do just that. Apparently, it is happening all the time, per the examples you have given. And if Paypal fails to enforce the rule, then I see no ethical violation of said rule.

 

Law officers frequently fail to enforce the law prohibiting folks from crossing the street except at crosswalks. Therefore, although it is against the law, it is an option that is still being given, and therefore does not have any violation of ethics. I have never, ever had an unethical feeling about crossing our street outside our marked crosswalk. Now, I've been aware that I am breaking the law, which makes me a "violator", but that does not equate to being "unethical".

 

Basically, to me, it's kind of like saying that fifty years ago, anyone who violated Jim Crow was behaving in an unethical manner. I hardly think so. Unlawful? perhaps, but as I stated elsewhere, "unlawful" does NOT equate to "unethical".

[MarkFeld]

And if Paypal fails to enforce the rule, then I see no ethical violation of said rule.

 

James, stealing is stealing, whether laws or rules against it are enforced or not. Ditto for other crimes.

[EVillageProwler]

And if Paypal fails to enforce the rule, then I see no ethical violation of said rule.

 

James, stealing is stealing, whether laws or rules against it are enforced or not. Ditto for other crimes.

 

I find it quite surprising that a dealer would publicly announce a gap in personal ethics.

 

I, for one, would think twice about dealing with such folks...

 

EVP

[newprepper]

I understand this whole thread, it is easy to violate principles when it is against a faceless corporation, the people who do this would not dream of doing it to friends though. It is just the nature of the beast, much like people steal from wal-mart or any other corporation, they aren't stealing from people, they are stealing from wal-mart, nevermind the fact that they are stealing from everybody, Waltons, stockholders, employees, consumers, because it all affects the cost of merchandise in the future, just the way it is

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I understand this whole thread, it is easy to violate principles when it is against a faceless corporation, the people who do this would not dream of doing it to friends though. It is just the nature of the beast, much like people steal from wal-mart or any other corporation, they aren't stealing from people, they are stealing from wal-mart, nevermind the fact that they are stealing from everybody, Waltons, stockholders, employees, consumers, because it all affects the cost of merchandise in the future, just the way it is

 

 

I was going to keep my mouth shut about this whole thing but (blah blah), I am not convinced the issue of the "Rule" is one of Ethic.

 

I realize the issue is being interpreted as Ethic, and if there is clarity of language in the "Rule" I would understand.

 

What I interpret is a frightfully worded Rule, that is subject to interpretations that allow the choice of action a person chooses.

 

However, intent by action speaks to the individual.

If the individual clearly interprets the Rule as stringent and confining, and acts to deceive, this is clearly an issue of Ethic.

 

If a person can not truly decide clear intent of the Rule, and after seeking clarity does not receive clarity and decides to act in good faith without intent to deceive, this is not Ethic.

[Raisethis2]

I can't believe this thread still carries on. I just passed a gas station where regular gasoline was $4.12 a gallon. I get home and the news tells me the price of gas is this high AND GOING HIGHER because the US is exporting to India and China and has run short of supplies because refineries across America are shutting down to switch to summer blends.

 

1. How can we ethically ship to foreign nations at the expense of our own economy and national security?

 

2. How can the decision makers in that industry shut down refineries when domestic supplies are low? Were they not aware?

 

3. Ethical behavior should begin at the highest levels of our civilization. If titans of business and government can't lead by example what chance does the average Joe have expecting it from his neighbor?

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

I can't believe this thread still carries on. I just passed a gas station where regular gasoline was $4.12 a gallon. I get home and the news tells me the price of gas is this high AND GOING HIGHER because the US is exporting to India and China and has run short of supplies because refineries across America are shutting down to switch to summer blends.

 

1. How can we ethically ship to foreign nations at the expense of our own economy and national security?

 

2. How can the decision makers in that industry shut down refineries when domestic supplies are low? Were they not aware?

 

3. Ethical behavior should begin at the highest levels of our civilization. If titans of business and government can't lead by example what chance does the average Joe have expecting it from his neighbor?

 

I understand your points and share your frustration.

I don't quite agree that Ethic begins at the highest levels.

It begins with the individual, regardless of place in society.

We collectively allowed the conditions that now exist.

Did we protest together by refusing to use all fuel driven transportation until exploitation stopped?

No, because frankly it is impractical as families still have to be provided for, hospitals, schools, etc. still have to operate and the people that are needed for the operation still have to get there.

Did we collectively demand changes in Law, with clarity of language , regardless of political leanings, that would protect society from such actions as you mention?

No, most of us didn't-we left it to the other guy, because we believed it would not matter anyway.

We have met the enemy.......

[FishyOne]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

 

You're right. I don't care.

 

Why is that YOUR business? Why do you care what other people are doing? It is none of your business.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I was specifically referring to the ethics of how one conducts themselves with Paypal, not the ethics of Paypal itself.

So was I ! And again, I do not believe that violating Paypal's rule (and I have not read the rule -- just the "spirit of the rule" from what you've posted) is a question of "ethics". Here's why:

 

Given the following:

 

Paypal says "this is our service, and we therefore have the right to set the terms of use for that service, and one of those terms is that you cannot use the fee-free personal payment option to purchase merchandise."

... something with this scenario does not make sense.

 

Paypal cannot be truthful in stating "you cannot use the fee-free personal payment option to purchase merchandise", because evidently, YOU CAN INDEED do just that. Apparently, it is happening all the time, per the examples you have given. And if Paypal fails to enforce the rule, then I see no ethical violation of said rule.

 

A little back story, then.

 

Paypal MUST offer the fee free transfer of funds generally, per federal regulation.

 

However...when people abuse the personal payment, and use it for purchases, Paypal can, and has, blocked the individual's ability to use Paypal personal.

 

So, they do indeed enforce their rule.

 

But regardless, even if they didn't, it's still stealing. Ease of opportunity doesn't change that.

 

Law officers frequently fail to enforce the law prohibiting folks from crossing the street except at crosswalks. Therefore, although it is against the law, it is an option that is still being given, and therefore does not have any violation of ethics. I have never, ever had an unethical feeling about crossing our street outside our marked crosswalk. Now, I've been aware that I am breaking the law, which makes me a "violator", but that does not equate to being "unethical".

 

Basically, to me, it's kind of like saying that fifty years ago, anyone who violated Jim Crow was behaving in an unethical manner. I hardly think so. Unlawful? perhaps, but as I stated elsewhere, "unlawful" does NOT equate to "unethical".

 

Stealing is stealing. It's quite a bit more serious than j-walking, or unjust laws. The prohibition against stealing is not an unjust law, by Western ethical standards.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I understand this whole thread, it is easy to violate principles when it is against a faceless corporation, the people who do this would not dream of doing it to friends though. It is just the nature of the beast, much like people steal from wal-mart or any other corporation, they aren't stealing from people, they are stealing from wal-mart, nevermind the fact that they are stealing from everybody, Waltons, stockholders, employees, consumers, because it all affects the cost of merchandise in the future, just the way it is

 

 

I was going to keep my mouth shut about this whole thing but (blah blah), I am not convinced the issue of the "Rule" is one of Ethic.

 

I realize the issue is being interpreted as Ethic, and if there is clarity of language in the "Rule" I would understand.

 

What I interpret is a frightfully worded Rule, that is subject to interpretations that allow the choice of action a person chooses.

 

However, intent by action speaks to the individual.

If the individual clearly interprets the Rule as stringent and confining, and acts to deceive, this is clearly an issue of Ethic.

 

If a person can not truly decide clear intent of the Rule, and after seeking clarity does not receive clarity and decides to act in good faith without intent to deceive, this is not Ethic.

 

I'm not quite sure what is unclear about the following:

 

""Personal Payment" means amounts sent between two individuals (not to or from a business) without a purchase"

 

(emphasis added)

 

https://cms.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=ua/UserAgreement_full&fli=true

 

Further:

 

4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments.

 

Now, I can understand where this may leave wiggle room..."well, they just said I couldn't ASK...they didn't say the buyer couldn't OFFER" (setting aside the obvious conflict of how do they find out in the first place)....but that wiggle room is completely shut by the definition of a Personal Payment.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

 

You're right. I don't care.

 

Why is that YOUR business? Why do you care what other people are doing? It is none of your business.

 

Um. You DO know that you were the one who announced publicly that you're ok with stealing, right...? You made it public knowledge.

 

As far as what you do...you also know that I have no way to stop you from doing whatever it is you wish to do, right...? What you do is controlled by you, and whatever code of ethics you adhere to.

 

Finally, as to why it's my business: stealing affects all of us, and is therefore all our business. Costs are higher, laws and codes and rules are tightened, all because of the greedy among us who want to take what isn't theirs. This is an inescapabale fact of life. So, yeah, you bet I'll speak out against it when I see it, especially such a blatant example.

[lehigh96]

Oh, and for the record...the person who posted this:

 

The reason is because he is a tool. And for the record, his long standing status is on the comics forum. I don't even think he collects coins.

 

Hey RMA, gonna call me out for my rules violation or do something productive, like get a life.

 

I don't know who this person is (other than their user id), but unprovoked lashing out at strangers on the internet...while a time honored tradition...isn't really the best way to build up any respect or credibility. You can disagree with someone without being hostile and insulting, especially unprovoked.

 

It's kinda funny....I get all sorts of grief on the comics side for being a dedicated coinee...and here, there are people claiming I don't even collect them. Ironic, no?

 

I'm sorry life has dealt you a tough set of cards. Best of luck to you.

 

I don't need to build up respect or credibility on this or any other coin forum. If you were actually a coin collector like you pretend to be, you would know this. Furthermore, we don't need to be lectured on the subject of ethics by a forum troll.

 

You want us to believe that you collect coins. Then start posting some coins and discussing coins and stop being the Paypal police. Nobody cares if Paypal doesn't get their fee.

 

Btw, do you really expect us to believe that you motive for posting this thread was to clarify to the point that you beat like a red headed step child in the thread that got zapped? Your such a good little troll. Post the thread and act like you motive is innocent. Then when it appears that everyone is fooled, you reveal your true agenda which was to respond to my slam which you couldn't do on the other thread since it got zapped. Of course, now you will deny it, while using 5 consecutive posts to do so all while trying to ruin my credibility in process.

 

We all know what you are, you aren't fooling anyone! Now go after that post count title.

 

I'm sorry, truly, that life has dealt you such a difficult set of cards that you have to lash out unprovoked at people like this. Truly. You're clearly not a happy person.

 

I don't know you, or anything about you, but you're clearly angry about something, and since you and I have never interacted, it's clearly not me.

 

That said, you're not the board spokesman, you don't speak for anyone but yourself, and what you choose to believe is none of my business, no matter how untrue it may be.

 

The fact remains: using Paypal personal to pay for merchandise is theft. To those who were inclined to steal before, this means nothing: you will continue to steal, because the problem is much deeper with you than what Paypal does. And, you will continue to scoff at anyone who stands up to theft. But you won't be able to do it in broad daylight.

 

Those who did not know, and who were not inclined to steal, probably welcome this information, as I did, so they could address it.

 

Best wishes to you.

 

Oh what's wrong, couldn't come up with anything original to say so you had to repeat your lame little poker reference? You are right about one thing, you don't know me or why I am angry but I will tell you. What angers me are the countless number of clowns who run roughshod over internet forums accumulating massive post counts without ever making a positive contribution to the forum. Since you have been posting on this forum, I have yet to see one single post from you that provided any numismatic education to the reader. All of your posts are incredibly argumentative speeches about tangential topics.

 

So while you are a legend in your own mind, ask yourself this question: "what have the members of the NGC Coin Forum learned from my posts?" If you are as honest as you claim in this thread, you will admit that the answer is "nothing." Your purpose on this forum is simply to feed your own ego and give meaning to your pitiful existence that leads you to post over 30 thousand times in 8 years. Seriously, do you ever leave your house? Or your computer for that matter?

 

Furthermore, I never said that using paypal gift isn't tantamount to theft. I simply stated that I and most of the board members of this forum don't care. I doubt Paypal would consider it theft since they routinely freeze peoples accounts for the sole purpose of generating interest on those funds while they are frozen. Naturally, this prevents the rightful owner of that money from transferring those funds into an interest generating account of their own. Now that is theft.

 

 

[FishyOne]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

 

You're right. I don't care.

 

Why is that YOUR business? Why do you care what other people are doing? It is none of your business.

 

Um. You DO know that you were the one who announced publicly that you're ok with stealing, right...? You made it public knowledge.

 

As far as what you do...you also know that I have no way to stop you from doing whatever it is you wish to do, right...? What you do is controlled by you, and whatever code of ethics you adhere to.

 

Finally, as to why it's my business: stealing affects all of us, and is therefore all our business. Costs are higher, laws and codes and rules are tightened, all because of the greedy among us who want to take what isn't theirs. This is an inescapabale fact of life. So, yeah, you bet I'll speak out against it when I see it, especially such a blatant example.

 

I guess RMA is now the world's moral authority and must enforce ethicst for us all.

 

RMA: Have you always given your employer 8 hours work for 8 hours pay? Ever slack off even for a minute? You stole from your employer. He who judges others will judged the harshest. Watch what you say. It will come back to haunt you. I guarantee it.

[James_OldeTowne]

James, stealing is stealing, whether laws or rules against it are enforced or not. Ditto for other crimes.

Mark, we completely 100% agree. Stealing is against the LAW, which is why the OP should have entitled the thread in that manner: "Breaking the law and Paypal", not "Ethics and Paypal". That is what this argument is truly about. There was no need to introduce misleading use of the term "ethics" into the argument -- that in itself is an ethical violation.

 

What's at issue here is the misunderstood difference between "ethics", and "law". These are not interchangeable terms, not in the least. Sadly, many people take advantage of the confusion between the two in order to make an argument sound like an "ethical" discussion when it is not. For some reason, folks often think that if they can portray something as an ethical discussion, then that somehow strengthens their point, but that is not the case if the argument has, in fact, nothing to do with ethics.

 

I find it unethical when the term "ethics" is misleadingly used, by intent, and out of context, to support an argument that is actually one of legality.

 

Incidentally, when it comes to being a dealer, I sleep very well at night knowing I have never stolen anything from anyone... EVER. And for the record, I have never ever even in one instance "stolen" from Paypal, because I do not use it, and I believe it is unethical to support that corrupt organization.

 

I find it quite surprising that a dealer would publicly announce a gap in personal ethics.

 

I, for one, would think twice about dealing with such folks...EVP

But you wouldn't think twice about dealing with someone who hides their "gap in personal ethics", right? Seriously, you don't see the flaw in your argument? Should I think twice about dealing with you because you fail to reveal your "personal gap in ethics"?

 

(... if you have any -- for all I know, you are the world's only perfect human.)

 

Without question, the world would be a much better place to live if everyone DID reveal their "gap in personal ethics".

 

Edited to fix spelling.

[James_OldeTowne]

A little back story, then.

 

Paypal MUST offer the fee free transfer of funds generally, per federal regulation.

 

However...when people abuse the personal payment, and use it for purchases, Paypal can, and has, blocked the individual's ability to use Paypal personal.

 

So, they do indeed enforce their rule.

 

But regardless, even if they didn't, it's still stealing. Ease of opportunity doesn't change that.

With regard to "stealing", you and I completely agree that stealing is illegal. I have never questioned that at all. However, because it is illegal does not suddenly lead to an argument over "ethics", which is the premise of your OP, and that is where we do not agree. Erroneously introducing the concept of "ethics" into the argument immediately calls into question your own ethics, because it was (seemingly) an intentional misuse of the term in order to elicit an emotional response in favor of your argument. (And by the way, it seems like others folks in this thread have unfairly attacked you -- I find your participation on the boards to be very positive and I trust you take nothing I write here as a personal attack!)

 

If you want to carry out an argument with regard to a legal situation (and I DO believe you have a legitimate argument), then your discussion would be much stronger by not confusing it with misuse of the word "ethical".

 

Stealing is stealing. It's quite a bit more serious than j-walking, or unjust laws.

Are you quite sure about that? You do realize that violation of Jim Crow led to serious punishment of violators in years past, right? Segregation was a much more egregious crime than 'stealing". A major reason Jim Crow was defeated was because Rosa Parks broke the law and refused to give up her bus seat to a white man.

 

It was definitely an illegal act, but was it unethical?

[MarkFeld]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

 

You're right. I don't care.

 

Why is that YOUR business? Why do you care what other people are doing? It is none of your business.

 

You asked someone else, but here's my answer: When people are dishonest and steal from businesses, it can negatively impact the honest people who don't engage in such behavior. So, I disagree that it's none of the business of those who don't steal.

[FishyOne]

I use PayPal Gift to buy and sell coins AND use Regular PayPal to buy and sell coins.

 

It's amazing how many people send PayPal Gift when buying coins from me. I just say I accept PayPal and at least 50% of the time the buyers send PayPal Gift.

 

PayPal could make 3% on every one of my transactions. They don't. It's likely under 2% and probably 1.5%. That 1.5% was roughly $300 for PayPal in 2012. Do I feel guilty that they didn't get $600? No.

 

Frankly, I'm shocked at how many people are so cavalier about stealing on this side of the board.

 

I guarantee, if someone stole from you, you'd have something to say about it.

 

But you care nothing that you and others steal from Paypal.

 

Mystifies me.

 

You're right. I don't care.

 

Why is that YOUR business? Why do you care what other people are doing? It is none of your business.

 

You asked someone else, but here's my answer: When people are dishonest and steal from businesses, it can negatively impact the honest people who don't engage in such behavior. So, I disagree that it's none of the business of those who don't steal.

 

Every time you go and buy groceries you pay 5% extra.

 

If PayPal doesn't want my business they can close my account. I couldn't care less. How does this effect you? Tell me. Explain it to me. How are you effected because I "steal" from PayPal.

 

Because I am a thief. How are you effected? Tell me. I want know.

 

Just spell it out so we can be clear where we stand. I want to know where you stand/

[Hard Times]

The problem with feeling bad for PayPal is that they don't follow their own rules, they force their monopoly on eBay, and they help commit fraud against sellers by not allowing common sense to prevail.

 

As a seller I'd rather take any other form of payment than PayPal. They're awful.

 

Sorry for being late to respond to one of the first posts, but I disagree with everything said in the above quoted statement by gmarguli. First the issue has nothing to do with 'feeling bad for PayPal', the issue is about ethics here on the boards and mis-using a PayPal option against the board policies as RockMy points out.

 

It is all great to bring out blanket statements like 'they help commit fraud against sellers', with of course, no examples to demonstrate it. Again, this is the kind of thing gmarguli always does here - pontificates with grand statement with nothing to back it up. While it may be true, give us specific examples gmarguli.

 

I have used PayPal for many years. I have never had a single problem with them in hundreds of transactions on ebay and off ebay as a buyer and a seller. It adds a layer of protection to my identity and a layer of protection for a purchase, and a convenient way to pay for things where it is offered. No doubt occasionally a transaction goes bad using PayPal, just like using any other form of payment. But they are not worse and no better than any other type of payment option out there IMHO.

 

Best, HT

 

 

[Hard Times]

Those debating whether RockMy should change his post title using the E word, here is the definition below, and I think RockMy has used a correct title. He specifically addresses the use of PayPal here on these boards and how that relates to following the RULES laid down by these boards for use. Hence, definition 2 below particularly is consistent with the word Ethics in RockMy's title and first post on this topic.

 

Best, HT

 

 

ethics

  Use Ethics in a sentence

eth·ics

[eth-iks] Show IPA

plural noun

1.( used with a singular or plural verb ) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.

2.the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.

3.moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.

4.( usually used with a singular verb ) that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.