public statement re: luftrum charity auction

[xoxos]

*edit* see post #2 for the short account of events..

i have been accused of (due to profanity i won't repeat it here)


sean ahern, whyterabbyt, has been informed on numerous occasions that he will never be my customer. without dragging out the whats and whens, i will summate his attitude of abuse (which includes years of childish denigration and name calling) by saying that he made eleven attempts to purchase a product via paypal in a matter of days despite (and i can link it if i have to, because it's been linked and quoted previously) being fully cognisant that he will never be my customer.

i was not able to respond to his initial bids in the auction because i couldn't use kvr, but i corresponded with luftrum and informed him that i could not allow my products to go to sean under any circumstances, and that i would outbid him myself if able. luftrum assured me that sean would not win the auction:


and, when sean did win the auction:


sean used this charity auction as an opportunity to malign me, which isn't particularly charitable. both sean and luftrum were well aware that i would not provide sean with anything in any manner whatsoever.



i understand that many of you will say "why not just give him the software?" the answer to this is that i do not wish to have *ANY* contract with sean whatsoever, because of how he will use the leverage. it is a complex issue and it is not trivial to produce a comprehensive explanation. i think an absolute refusal to have anything to do with the gentleman is easy to understand and not entirely objectionable if one isn't aware of the history.

i ask that those of you who are unaware of what has transpired to refrain from judgement. i was the third participant in this auction to jump on board and lend public support to the auction. giving away a software license is a simple thing, it takes a matter of minutes, it's not a big deal. but i will NOT have anything that amounts to a contract with sean, and he has been aware of this for months before the auction.

he knew this when he placed the bids. since this is obvious, i think one may infer that either he *really wants* my software, or he bid on it because he knew that i would refuse to provide him with it, and that he would be able to proceed in the manner he has.


anyone who posts any abuse, diatribe or accusations in this thread be aware ahead of time that your post will be deleted.

[xoxos]

this is all so immature..

speaker A) *abuse* abuse* now sell me your software

speaker B) no, i will not sell you software because you are abusive to me

(repeat above several times)

speaker C) let's have a charity auction, who will participate?

speaker B) i'll participate

speaker A) i am the top bidder, now give me your software

speaker B) i still will not give you software because you are abusive

speaker A) you ****ed the charity auction

speakers D, E) yeah, you suck



whatever happened to life??

[Perimeter Sound]

If you had a stipulation on your charity offering with Luftrum, ie = you let him know ahead of time, then it's on him to solve the situation with consideration to that stipulation. You need not serve anyone you choose not to, that's your right, X2 if you stated it ahead of time. *shrug*

[TFF]

Christ, I don't think I've ever seen someone put money on the line just to stir up shit on a message board.

From what I've seen, you're a good man. Keep doing what you're doing and ignore the idiots.

[DavyAch]

I have to agree on this too. If a developer wants to auction his stuff publically, but with that mentions that he wants one or more specific persons not too win, I think the authority of the Auction should decline the participation of the developer in question. Because that goes completely against the idea of an auction, especially one for charity reasons.

You may well be right, but xoxos was one of the early developers in, and I strongly suspect Luftrum was only thinking of the charity and building some momentum. It is him I feel for, pouring in his time and energy but being stuck in the middle of this.

Anyway, apparently nearly $7,500 was raised, in case anyone forgets.....

[Nielzie]

I have to agree on this too. If a developer wants to auction his stuff publically, but with that mentions that he wants one or more specific persons not too win, I think the authority of the Auction should decline the participation of the developer in question. Because that goes completely against the idea of an auction, especially one for charity reasons.

You may well be right, but xoxos was one of the early developers in, and I strongly suspect Luftrum was only thinking of the charity and building some momentum. It is him I feel for, pouring in his time and energy but being stuck in the middle of this.

Anyway, apparently nearly $7,500 was raised, in case anyone forgets.....

True, the auction was a wonderful initiative, I fully agree with that and I hope to see one in 2012 too (the world will need it some Mayan told me)

My point is only, they knew it could happen and therefore could have avoided this situation. Simple as that.

But normally this scenario should be very unlikely to happen! Because why would he still want to have a license for these products after all that has been said and happend in the past with the developer?? What where his motivations?

[WOK]

But normally this scenario should be very unlikely to happen! Because why would he still want to have a license for these products after all that has been said and happend in the past with the developer?? What where his motivations?

Maybe he knew this would place bad opinions about xoxos in the public? Or that xoxos would have to pay the money at the end?
But it's correct that as in ebay anyone can lock someone from an auction (because he had bad experiences with him) the responsible for this auction system should have banned him from the start.
I don't know the story, but as a businessman I can choice with whom I want to make business and sell something, and with whom not (auction or shop). So whyterabbyt must in fact be a strange guy if he don't want to accept this, and this makes me feel that xoxos is right....

[WOK]

. . . .

Well, as I said, I don't know the story (but I am sure there is one, things like this don't come from nothing).

whyterabbyt has been informed on numerous occasions that he will never be my customer.

If this is not true, OK, than xoxos is a strange guy alleging it.     If it's true, why don't you accept it and spend your money somewhere else - defiantness?

[xoxos]

the first post indicated that detraction would be deleted, and that includes any statement by sean. i don't read sean's posts, i don't do business with sean. if any reader chooses to begrudge me for it, it's your choice to judge without being fully informed on the matter.

ftr the software went to the runner-up in the auction, for $70 instead of $80.

this thread is locked.