[MannyEsco]

Maybe it is because we are a slower forum but the basketball threads seem to get moderated more strictly than the others. A little common sense and consistency is all we ask.

+1

[dodgytrousers]

It's very simple.

There is nothing for sale on a closed ebay auction page.
There is nothing for sale on a photobucket page.

There IS something for sale on a current ebay auction page.

This isn't rocket science.

Apologies to OP for derailing the thread...

As you so helpfully pointed out:

"Posting links that take users outside of the Beckett.com website for commercial purposes is not allowed".

eBay and Photobucket (as examples) are websites with commercial purposes. Even on a completed eBay auctions or a photobucket pages there is for-profit advertising. It is a simple fact.

But the "interpretation" that you have taken from the TOS is that a ongoing auction is somehow much more dangerous than a completed one.

Funny because I thought your "job is to enforce the TOS as it is...not as we want it to be."

Actually, I personally don't blame you, ceocards, and this was never supposed to be about the mods because I am sure you guys are all just told what to do and you do it. However at some point when the majority of users agree that a certain rule makes no sense and is holding back this site then we are going to express our concerns.

If it was Beckett.com's intent to stop us from linking to every website with a commercial purpose then ban all links to external sites, not just the ones you think are bad. However I highly doubt that was Beckett.com's intentions.

Links to web pages that have obviously collector interest should be left as is or we will see the site shrink even more than it has already.

That's it. That's all I have to say. Sorry to everyone for going off topic. I will leave this thread alone now.

[vgqv]

As you so helpfully pointed out:

"Posting links that take users outside of the Beckett.com website for commercial purposes is not allowed".

eBay and Photobucket (as examples) are websites with commercial purposes. Even on a completed eBay auctions or a photobucket pages there is for-profit advertising. It is a simple fact.

But the "interpretation" that you have taken from the TOS is that a ongoing auction is somehow much more dangerous than a completed one.

Funny because I thought your "job is to enforce the TOS as it is...not as we want it to be."

Actually, I personally don't blame you, ceocards, and this was never supposed to be about the mods because I am sure you guys are all just told what to do and you do it. However at some point when the majority of users agree that a certain rule makes no sense and is holding back this site then we are going to express our concerns.

If it was Beckett.com's intent to stop us from linking to every website with a commercial purpose then ban all links to external sites, not just the ones you think are bad. However I highly doubt that was Beckett.com's intentions.

Links to web pages that have obviously collector interest should be left as is or we will see the site shrink even more than it has already.

That's it. That's all I have to say. Sorry to everyone for going off topic. I will leave this thread alone now.

I agree with everything you've written. The OP wasn't promoting anything, simply trying to start a discussion about Hakeem Olajuwon cards. Some strictly by the book mod takes it upon himself to delete his links and the thread has now turned to this. Way to go, guys. Thanks for doing your "job". *rolls eyes*. I should've been a football collector, not basketball I guess?

[ceocards]

This is the last thing that I'll post - then I'm locking the thread with apologies to the OP, who is free to reopen the original topic in a new thread if he so desires (minus the link of course )

I agree that the OP was not promoting the auction
I agree that the OP was merely trying to start a discussion

That is not up for debate...I concede those points.

However, the rules are what they are - both what is written and how we have been asked to enforce them.

Yes, we moderate "by the book". There is good reason for that. If we start allowing exceptions or different interpretations, it appears that we are playing favorites and not moderating consistently - isn't that what you guys all said you wanted?? Consistency?? What better and easier way is there to be consistent than to simply enforce the rules as they stand?

You can roll your eyes and make snarky comments all you want - won't change anything. If you want a rule changed, write to Bill or another Beckett employee who will have the authority and decision making power to consider your request.