It might be helpful if someone could share the "rules of etiquette" here when it comes to "posting eBay auctions." I am confused and suspect new members/posters might be confused. I have seen references to the impropriety of 'posting eBay auctions.' I have seen after auction closed references to items that may have been of interest to someone here.

Please clarify:
1)What does 'posting eBay auctions' mean?
2) What are the 'rules of etiquette' y'all would like posters to follow?

If this is all explained in another thread, the citation would be appreciated. Thanks.

This is just my opinion,, and mine only,,,

Ebay is a public web-site, so I see no reason why we can not share Ebay listings here. It is an open market any way you look at it, so if someone here wants to post something from Ebay because they know someone may be looking for that particular item I don't see anything wrong with that. However, you must remember by doing that, you know have shown all of our viewers that very same item...so now someone else may want to bid on that same item. I do know some of our club members ebay screen names, and if I see them bidding, and I know it is something they really want, I generally stop bidding.

We all have to remember that the cost of the item is driven by the person that is willing to pay the most for that item. That does not make that person a bad person! We all get caught up in the price that some items sell for....in fairness, if that were your own item, would you not want it to be sold for top dollar.

If you truly would like to see a club member have the item, then post it here on our forum, set your price, first come, first to own. I know Charlie Watrous has done this from time to time as have others.

Ebay is an auction no different than a household auction that you may attend in your own towns. Sometimes box after box of things will sell for a $1.00, but then if the right crowd of people are there, that same box may sell for $100.00.

Sometimes it is very discouraging when you don't win something you would really like to own, but I never let that make me bitter, but just keep looking for something even better.

Again,,,,,

JUST MY OPINION!!

Morgan

The Presidents opinion is a rule of law surely not? ;]

I agree with what Morgan has said. It's not Harrods opening up after hours soley that the Queen may waltz through undeterred by the masses.

I agree, there is no reason that posting of auctions for things you may not be interested in yourself would harm anyone of reasonable intellect and maturity.

Since we're on the subject, how about a little shameless self-promotion? I have auctions running now, and intend on listing more next week. Vintage & newer vacs, toaster, etc.

Once again "someone" is up to pointless instigating.

There is no law, rule, policy, guideline, suggestion, decree, declaration or stipulation about posting eBay auctions.

If people want to post links to eBay auctions, they're not going to be shot at the firing squad or hung by the neck until dead. They won't even get their hands smacked.

We all have our own opinions about this. I have expressed my opinion about. I personally choose not to post them except in the case of auctions that have closed, and then only if there is something interesting or spectacular about them. And I have my reasons for this.

Obviously, other people disagree with me -- and that's cool. We all have our opinions and our reasons for them. It's a big world and there is plenty of room for lots of opinions.

It's a pointless discussion. But, then, there are people who seem to enjoy quibbling just for the sake of quibbling. Sad that they don't have more to offer than their annoying and provocative joustings.

Now how's THAT for a passive-aggressive riposte.

Mark,

One more thought,

I am glad you posted this thread as I remember being caught in the cross fire of this discussion when I first joined the VCCC.

Again, my opinion is just that my opinion. I have truly enjoyed all the posting about E-bay items. The one thing that we all have to remember is that we are never going to win everything we want to win at the price we want... but that doesn't make the seller or the buyer an evil person. I am always thankful that someone ends up owning the vacuum or appliance.... and it doesn't have to go to the appliance junk yard and yet another piece of our history has been saved for the future members of this club.

Greg, your current E-bay list is awesome...I have been watching a couple of items.......

By the way, we are under a Winter Storm Warning..it has started to snow and now the freezing rain has moved in... could be interesting. I may be sleeping here at Wally World tonight.. with the rest of the people that I think live here...
(the credit union I work for is located in the Wal-Mart Super Center here in Dubuque)
Morgan

We started the day iced up. I felt I needed to get to the office to be sure the way was salted for pedestrian traffic (and had a wonderful breakfast at a just opened restaurant across the street - Mia's Bongo Room.) Things are improving (roads safer with higher temperatures) but tonight is a bit iffy.
Y'all taker care.

My local weather watch icon is flashing on the bottom of my screen "winter storm watch" and just in the last few minutes I checked and now it's a "freezing rain warning". I'ts currently -3 C or about 29 F. Just came in from mowing and bagging fallen leaves in the backyard and I still haven't got them all :(

Those who live in truly inclement weather must truly be amused by Southern California.

We had a good rainfall yesterday, nothing spectacular, just a good day-long rain. On all the news programs it was "STORM WATCH 2007" -- then everyone starts running around fretting about the inevitable mudslides up in the hills and canyons that were burned dry in the brush fires, all around people's homes put in places where homes should never have been put.

Any of y'all seen photos of the shoebox-shaped homes out here that are stuck long-wise in the sides of cliffs with the other end precariously perched atop 100-ft. pylons that look like thin stilts?! I get vertigo just LOOKING at those homes. And people wonder why their houses get washed away.

And oy VEY the traffic. Two drops of rain and everyone goes beserk -- either driving way too slow or way too fast.

God help L.A. if it ever REALLY got "weather" as my dad would say!

I remember those homes in Studio City and the days early in the season when it started to rain. Yikes!! You would think the world was coming to an end. My first rain in LA found a friend in a panic. I thought, boy, you guys should have a good rain and ice storm like Chicago. I told her that she hadn't lived until she drove on ice and did a 360 slide. I knew some folks that wouldn't come in to work when it rained. In Chicago, come rain, sleet or snow, people show up for work.

Charles and Fred,

I just had this same conversation the other day. I too was amused and somewhat appalled at the big ordeal people in L.A. made over a little rain. Coming from Alaska, I too thought, "you've got to be kidding me people; it's just a little rain. Try doing this on black ice." I shouldn't be too harsh on L.A. drivers, however. The good drivers--I'm sure there are a few--have to contend with people driving at unsafe speeds, too fast AND too slow. Most, I'm sure, never had the opportunity to take a defensive driving course.

When I took my driver's test for my license in Maryland in 1973 at age 17 (the legal driving age back then was 16, wonder if it still is), there was about 6" of snow on the ground. The roads were icy and slippery, and it was a very grueling test. The guy from the DMV said, if you can pass this test you'll be one helluva a good driver! Especially, try parallel parking on what amounted to an ice rink floor. But I passed the test with flying colors, and to this day can, with little effort, park my car in a space so tight you can't slip a piece of paper between the car in front and the car in back when I am done!

And it prolly wasn't a Corolla either was it LOL
The car I took my test in was a full size 72 Mercury when full size still was full size. Hell even the mid size cars then were bigger than the full size cars now

Actually, it was a 1967 Plymouth Baracuda Fastback!

Virtually identical to the copper-colored one in the link below. It was originally my oldest brother's car; I eventually inherited it. Ohhh, the stories the back seat of THAT car could tell!!

I am not an eBay person (yet) so I don't know a lot about how it works (except what I see here and from a couple of guys at the counter at Leo's Diner). Anyway, is historical sales data available? That is, can you scan through old sales, etc.?

Reference post #25628 above. CR, it really isn't a pointless discussion. We were having a fair discussion. Your post was a little offputting to me. And, frankly, frustrating. Let me try to explain:

You have much talent and are a walking library of valuable information. You also appear to be a fairly diligent monitor of eBay auctions. Because of your many contributions, hard work, and web visibility, information and inquiry comes to you. You can be very generous about sharing that information. And I agree that you have every right to share, or not share, as, and when, you choose.

And people are free to set, and voice or not voice, any standard they like vis-à-vis eBay auctions or any other information. People are also free to deviate from, or change, those standards deliberately, or arbitrarily. People are free to make those choices for strategic reasons or no reason at all.

What is confusing, and frustrating to me, is when you Bogart information about stuff that we might have been interested in acquiring and let us know about it when the opportunity is gone. Specifically, I am referencing two incidents that you decided to tell us about. One was when you related to us you had been contacted by the sister of a deceased collector and sort of blew her off without referring her to the club. Then, you told us about it when the collection was gone.

The second one that occurs to me is the leather covered Hoover sales guy notebook that was on eBay. You shared that with us after the sale closed. I know of a couple of people whose fathers sold Hoovers who would have been happy to pay more than that closing bid. And what a special stocking stuffer it could have been.

Now, you might say ‘tough luck, Mark, watch eBay yourself” – and that’s right. It certainly isn’t your job to give anyone a heads up. It’s just frustrating to me when you decide to tell us, after the fact, about opportunities we missed while at the same time justifying it because you hold some value, or notion, that you are taking a higher road.

I think there is nothing wrong, on a forum like this, with having this discussion. And here is another point: I suspect I am not the only one who feels this way but I think a lot of people have seen reactions like post #25628 above and decide maybe the safer road is to remain silent.

Holy Hannah... that bug eye Kenmore of yours went for a big amount LOL

I am probably going to regret getting drawn into this, given the way this tiresome discussion has unraveled in the past, and given how everything I say gets "spin-doctored" and mis-interpreted, (always with the intent of casting me in an unflattering light).

But here goes.



You have much talent and are a walking library of valuable information.

That may be the case. And I do share my "valuable information" to the extent that I have the time and energy to. I believe you will find few very people who would disagree with my suggestion that I share far more with the club than the average member does, and on many levels. That has nothing to do with what goes on on eBay.



You also appear to be a fairly diligent monitor of eBay auctions. Because of your many contributions, hard work, and web visibility, information and inquiry comes to you. You can be very generous about sharing that information. And I agree that you have every right to share, or not share, as, and when, you choose.

Again, what does this have to do with people posting eBay listings on Vacuumland?

You see, Mark, I know what you're up to. You just can't let the "value of old sweepers" dead horse remain dead can you. This is yet another attempt to resurrect that topic and to once again lob the accusation that I have some deep dark motive for keeping this information "Above Top Secret."



And people are free to set, and voice or not voice, any standard they like vis-à-vis eBay auctions or any other information. People are also free to deviate from, or change, those standards deliberately, or arbitrarily. People are free to make those choices for strategic reasons or no reason at all.

Absolutely. And they are ALSO free to demur from posting whatever they feel like demurring from, yet you don't seem gracious enough to extend that same license to me when I choose to demur from posting eBay listings.

REGARDLESS of my reasons for such demurral -- and the reasons are NOT the selfish and self-serving reasons you think they are -- I do reserve the right not to do so, and shall continue to exercise that right even in the face of being accused of selfishly withholding "valuable information" from the club.



What is confusing, and frustrating to me, is when you Bogart information about stuff that we might have been interested in acquiring and let us know about it when the opportunity is gone. Specifically, I am referencing two incidents that you decided to tell us about. One was when you related to us you had been contacted by the sister of a deceased collector and sort of blew her off without referring her to the club. Then, you told us about it when the collection was gone.

See, there you go again.

I do NOT "Bogart" information. And I did not "blow anyone off."

Just because I don't post every single eBay listing I happen upon, and just because I don't offer services as an appraiser GRATIS to every person who contacts me via the Internet, and just because I don't exert the energy to refer every single such query to this forum, does not mean I am "Bogarting." And I deeply resent the implication.

You have no idea how many of these queries I receive. I have had an Internet presence for more than 12 years -- longer than most people here have even had computers or knew what the Internet was.

Having had a web site for so long means that I get very favorable listings on search engines. Don't believe me? Go to goggle.com, type "vintage vacuum cleaner" or, say, "vintage electrolux vacuum" in the query box, and see whose site comes out on the top, or very near the top.

In fact, I'll save you the trouble. See screen shots below. (But, no, wait, you'd better just do it yourself lest you think I have just mocked up these screen shots to further flummox and hoodwink you.)

When the many people across the globe who are looking for information start searching on the Internet and a page from my site comes up, guess whom they are gonna contact.

Yep.

And guess what they want to know 99% of the time:

Yep.

"How much is Aunt Tillie's old sweeper worth?"

I am not a professional appraiser. Not only do I not KNOW (or, for that matter, CARE) how much old sweepers are worth, I don't get paid to answer a bunch of pesky people who have no deeper interest in a recently acquired machine than how much they can get for it. Why should I bother? What's in it for me?

Suppose I tell someone their old machine is worth, say, a thousand dollars, and then they spend money to list it on eBay or showcase it at an auction house, get nothing for it, are out-of-pocket for their listing fees, and then file a lawsuit against me for giving them bad advice? Don't think that could happen? Then you have not been an attorney for as long as you claim to have been.

Let them take their priceless vintage appliance to Sothebys or Christies and pay a professional appraiser to appraise them (and, of course, get laughed off the premises) if they are so concerned about the value.

NOW ... the ones I =do= answer are along the lines of:

Hello, I have just found an old Vac-de-luxe in my parents' summer home. It's a neat old machine and I'd like to know more about it. What can you tell me about its age and where, if possible, I could get it fixed up so I can display it?

Hello, I have just found an old Vac-de-luxe in my parents' summer home. It's a neat old machine and I'd hate to just throw it out. Would you have any interest in it? I'd be happy to send it to you for the cost of shipping, just to see it go to a good home instead of going to the dump.

But here again, this has NOTHING to do with eBay, despite your attempt to make it so.



The second one that occurs to me is the leather covered Hoover sales guy notebook that was on eBay. You shared that with us after the sale closed. I know of a couple of people whose fathers sold Hoovers who would have been happy to pay more than that closing bid. And what a special stocking stuffer it could have been.

For your information, it just so happens that I did not see that listing until after it had closed; and would not have seen it even then - at all - had not someone else emailed it to me when it closed. We both marveled at the pittance it had gone for, and I figured other collectors would marvel as well, so I posted it simply as a "human interest" item. Had I knew it was going to raise all these red flags for you, and push all these buttons on your Paranoia Control Panel, I would have refrained from doing so.

Here again, you have set forth the accusation that I am some kind of stingy, mean-spirited person who sits here day in and day out culling through eBay listings and refusing to "share that information" ....... to serve -- what motive?

Just to be mean?

Because I want to bid on the items and don't want anyone else to see them?

Well, in the former - nonsense. I may have my faults but petty meanness is not one of them.

And in the latter - if you would bother to check my eBay activity you would see that my vacuum cleaner purchases on eBay are very few and very far between. Not only do I not have money to fritter away on eBay, I also do not have anywhere to put any more stuff.

Again, your suggestions and accusations are delusional, without merit, and indeed could be construed as slander and character assassination.



Now, you might say "tough luck, Mark, watch eBay yourself" – and that's right. It certainly isn't your job to give anyone a heads up.

You are absolutely right. Not only is it certainly not "my job," it's also not my obligation. If people want to look for vacuums on eBay, they can search just as easily as I can. I don't have any magic buttons on my computer keyboard to make eBay searching any easier than anyone else can do it. So why would you harbor the ill-framed opinion that I, or ANYONE ELSE, =should= feel obliged to so? And that, furthermore, if I do NOT do it, that I am "withholding information?"



It's just frustrating to me when you decide to tell us, after the fact, about opportunities we missed while at the same time justifying it because you hold some value, or notion, that you are taking a higher road.

First off, I don't understand the frustration. If you are so interested in securing treasures on eBay, then get busy and start LOOKING, instead of spending so much time spinning all these passive-aggressive wheels in your head and carrying on, and on, and ON with this endless, pointless, meaningless argument and styling all these unflattering characterizations about me.

Second off, as I already pointed out, I was not "holding some value, or notion, that I was taking a higher road" because I only posted about the Hoover leather binder (case at hand). I DID NOT SEE IT UNTIL IT HAD CLOSED.


Is that clear now?



I think there is nothing wrong, on a forum like this, with having this discussion. And here is another point: I suspect I am not the only one who feels this way but I think a lot of people have seen reactions like post #25628 above and decide maybe the safer road is to remain silent.

No, I suspect the reason other people are remaining silent is because they are TIRED of your endless, persistent GOADING about this subject. And I have emails in hand, yes, oh, that big bugaboo, sent to me privately, where people have stated as much. I am not the only one who has had more than my fill of this topic. Far from it.

Have I said enough now? Let's see how far a further response from you will get you.

I cannot possibly explain myself more lucidly nor fully. If you still don't GET IT, then that's your problem -- not mine.

Sorry if that seems "uncharitable" ---- but I really am so very tired of this subject.

Charles-Richard, let me clarify.

Regarding the Hoover Notebook. In the foregoing Post #25778 you said:
“For your information, it just so happens that I did not see that listing until after it had closed;”

However in Thread #2342 Post #25590 you said:
“I purposefully did not bother to bid, figuring it would go waaaay past my range.”

It is reasonable to take that to mean you saw it before it closed. Isn’t that how you would read that sentence? Or was it a typo or something. But like I admitted, it is not your job to give anyone a heads up.

Regarding the collection that slipped away, in Thread #1917, Post #20521 you said:
“This very same exact thing happened when another oldtimer from the club died a couple of years ago. He also had not stated any provisions for his collection in his will (again, of very early machines) but his family found correspondence in his files from me. One of his sisters contacted me to see if I would like to "purchase his valuable collection of antique vacuum cleaners." I did not even her how much she wanted for them,. I stated that if she thought they were of such great value they should be donated to a museum, or taken to auction at Sothebys. Of course, I never heard anything further from her. And most likely, they ended up at the local Goodwill.”

A fair reading of the foregoing quote is that you heard that an old member of the club died, that his collection was available, and you did not post that information or refer her to a club officer for posting.

So, you see, it really is confusing. It was you who turned this thing ugly with Post #25628. We were just talking. Relax.

Well what can I say. I guess I'm just a sneaky, devious, greedy, selfish, uncooperative old meanie then.

I could bother to explain the above-enumerated "discrepancies" but there is really no point in doing so.

Besides, as I noted, I have already said my piece -- and then some -- about this topic and shall say no more.

Thank You both for you opinion...now lets move on!

Morgan

What does "move on" (with an explanation mark) mean in this context. New members might wonder if this is the president of the club shutting down a thread. Are you instructing me to stop posting on this thread? Please clarify.

I just don't want this thread to get out of control. I think enough has been said. It appears that this will just be a debate between two people...I am just asking that if that is the case, it be taken to personal email.

I enjoy everyone's opinions and I respect everyone's opinion, but there are times when folks just plain won't agree...and continuing a debate like that doesn't do anyone any good.

Again, Just MY OPINION

Morgan

For the innocent and uninitiated, let me do a short Q&A.

Q. How does it happen that a site with so many members can have a thread that suddenly stops in the middle of a spirited discussion? Why wouldn’t the activity peter out instead of stop so suddenly?
A. You need to know that whenever a topic becomes “controversial” there is a companion off-site email thread among the “in” group. This off-site thread provides “suggestions” as to how to handle the on-thread activity. It can also “pull the plug” without it looking official. That is, the message is spread that this group, or this person, is to refrain from responding.

Q. How is it people complain about a discussion being bothersome when they had to voluntarily click into the discussion in the first place?
A. That is because of all of the off-site email activity. Of course entering a thread is a voluntary choice. It is not the thread that is making them tired and annoyed, it is the companion off-site emails. You know, emails like, “You’re the president, do something” or, “I don’t know why he feels such a need to probe this area, what do you think?”, or “His wife seemed nice enough, but….”, etc. etc. etc. So when you see that expression of exhausted annoyance, or concern, it is probably coming from the off-site email stuff.

Q. If you aren’t in the “in” group, how do you know about such activity?
A. 1). It is the nature of the beast; and 2). There is no way to control that activity and be sure of loyalties. So, stuff leaks.

Personally, I find such off-site activity to be insidious and I feel it is damaging to the free exchange of ideas on the forum. You have to be careful about such observations, however, or they will think you are from St. Louis. But, as they say, that is just my opinion.

Mark,

Again, I am expressing my opinion, the last time a thread similar to this one took place, we noticed a significant drop in posting. People that come here want to have fun. We are never going to all agree, but there is no reason to point out faults of another person. That not what we are about... we are about collecting, restoring and preserving old vacuums.

I do however take issue with your remark about an "In Crowd". I have not spoken to anyone about my opinions that I have posted in any way. I did let the board know that I thought this thread could get out of control and it has...I would not be a good leader if I did not see that one coming.

There is not an "In Crowd" as you call it, there are groups of people within this club that do get together for mini-meets and other social gatherings.. not an "In Crowd". All we ask here on the this forum is that everyone treat each other with respect...That is all I am asking, if you have personal issues with someone else...take it off the forum and move it to personal email.

If you remember correctly, I was very glad this thread was started so I could voice my opinion and others did as well. However, you and Charles don't agree and that is clearly obvious. We all ready know that, we have seen it in several threads, so why not settle the discussion between the two of you off line...

I'm just itching, itching I say, to respond but I will need some time to compose my thoughts so in the meantime can we all just agree that Charles is as he says a devious, greedy old meanie, oh and selfish as well, can't forget that one, and that Mark is being overwrought in his quest to expose the identities of the most secretive of Vacuumlands "in group"

At least until I have had as I said a chance to compile my paper which I shall title " Behavioral Science as it Relates to Vacuumabilia Collectors " LOL

I'm sure Mark will take the weekly harangue at vacuumland over Ho Chi Minh's hoardes any day ;p

Reread the thread, from the start. Do you still feel that correcting a record (it's all on the site) that was misasserted, in this very thread, by a volunteer, (who says he is not entitled to a pass) -- is me "pointing out faults?" Nit picking?

That if someone states, in this thread, and with total self-righteousness, something that the record would clearly show to be otherwise, it is "pointing out faults" to cite that record? That my job is to remain silent and let the false record stand? Is that your position?

Is it your position that if someone, in favor, states that Turner Gill got the head coach job at Nebraska, it is "pointing out faults" to suggest that it was Bo Polini? That in order to be a proper poster it is necessary to let my mates across the pond think Mr. Gill got the job?

This is just a thread. Out of control? Only if you are heavy into control. There is enough control coming off-line - no need for the president to monitor the discussion at all. Unless, of course, someone is sending you emails - lobbying your intervention.

Like I have said before, sometimes the rules here are mystifying.

At post #25821 you said you didn't want this thread to get out of control. At Post #25830 you said this thread is out of control. There was only one intervening post, #25822.
And now we are out of control. Presumably Post #25822 crossed the line, did it? Touched the touchy button, did it? Deranged. Mad cow. Denny Crane.

In Post #25830 it is suggested that “…the last time a thread similar to this one took place, we noticed a significant drop in posting….” I’m from Missouri, remember, you need to show me. What thread are we referring to? Thread #1917 with 60 posts or another thread I can’t find at the moment that has over 100 posts? I have, myself, noticed drops in posting when no “similar thread” activity has been going on. In fact, I have seen comment on it at times it couldn’t possibly have been my fault.

If we are going to use statistics, please forgive me but I have, over the years, learned to be a little critical. That is, statistical data really needs to be studied instead of just accepted. What level of membership would it take to have a look at those numbers? Not just posts, but hits/views/etc. Comment on posting data without viewing data can be somewhat misleading. We promise to be very careful if you give my techie the codes to have a look at those logs.

One of my favorite statistical funnies is the Ronald McDonald pull tab effort. But I digress.

Mark mark mark.. you're digging and parsing and dissecting and excavating this thread to death and I fear for your sanity LOL

I don't believe there's any underground, secretive, nefarious "in group" busy-bodying themselves with emails, smoke-signals, teletypes or whatever means of communications in regards to this.

Hang on a second my pigeon Homer just landed on the windysill and he smells faintly of freshly squeezed California orange juice.

Always refreshing to hear/see the voice of sanity.

You place me, or I have placed myself, at somewhat of a disadvange relative to your point. You see, I always - I mean always - have backup documentation for my "positions." In my practice, I have made it a point to develop the reputation that I say nothing I cannot back up. That's where you get credibility. Over time.

However, I have, with little exception, made it clear to anyone who contacts me off thread that I will not embarrass them with on thread disclosure. In some cases, I have asked those contacting me off thread to please refrain because I feel that what needs to be said should be said "on thread."

So, while my normal response would be to provide you with back up "chapter and verse" I will not betray those confidences. If that means I have conceded your point, so be it, but I suspect that a man of your integrity would not ask me to betray confidences. And I also suspect you don't think I am lying to you.

I have kept copies of threads that I thought were important only in that they were directly hurtful to someone and posted publicly. The small stuff like this I don't care about. I also email people on here and other sites, some of them I talk to on the phone and naturally there have been conversations relating to others, episodic events, etc. It's not unnatural or insidious to do that when it's done without malice. I'm very interested in peoples points of view, probably more than most, but everything reaches its saturation point sooner or later like this thread has.

I truly am trying to understand all this. How do you define "Saturation Point"? This thread has my tag at the top, a warning to all about what a waste of time it would be to enter. So, did it reach the saturation point at the end of your last post or had it reached that point and you contributed anyway?

I keep saying, the rules here are trippy.

Kind of like our president and his definition of "out of control". Just for fun, please tell me the point at which we reached the saturation point?

Almost forgot. Do you realize that coming into this crazy place tonight you are now bigger than Ethel Smith? Awesome, man.

Well I don't know exactly where it reached its saturation point, a figure of speech. By the term I refer to when I personally would assume that the once vast audience of silent viewers tired of it all and collectively or not "changed the channel" until no one was left you and I.
At this point in my mind anyways like on educational tv or PBS, this might be the point where the movie has ended and the host or the critics, or the prof and students all sit around and muse over what they just saw. LOL

But I still would like to see the logs. Hits/views are important. It isn't just about posts. Keep warm.

To save Morgan or Fred the trouble I'll go ahead and say it
PLEASE,PLEASE TAKE THIS TO PRIVATE EMAIL!!!!! Let's get back to the sheer vacuum madness shall we?

Matt,
In light of the fact that you had to voluntarily click your way in here, how the heck does this thread prevent you from returning to "sheer vacuum madness"? Isn't any discomfort you are feeling, or contraint, self-imposed? Aren't you posting here because you couldn't help yourself? Get a grip, man. Use some discipline. Stay away from such threads. You are acting like a Democrat, wanting government to take care of you.

I never thought I'd see a board for the discussion of vacuum cleaners become so complicated.

Sure we have a President, but it now seems we have rival political parties, some sort of Masonic order or Illuminati, spies, and a healthy dose of cold war paranoia.

Here's hoping guerilla warfare won't break out. Again.

But seriously, when we're going over statistics with a fine-tooth comb, don't we ever find ourselves thinking 'there must be more to life than this?'

Jack,
Good points. Oh yes, welcome. You are here, ergo, this is your life. Certinly you are not saying that people interested in statistical analysis have lives that are lesser in value and fulfillment than your life? Life is full of stuff and full of different stuff for different folks.

I mean, think about it. We collect vacuum cleaners! Don't you s'pose some people think we should get a life!!!

And from those people, I learnt the valuable lesson of agreeing to disagree.

...sounds warm and fuzzy. But, how helpful is it really. Doesn't that concept really represent quitting. I mean, what if it is important. What if an important point is totally lost or shouted out or "controlled?" What if "they" are permitting injustice to occur? Really, you just shrug your shoulders and let it go?
Especially in a forum/thread in which participation is totally voluntary - you step in and try to end the discussion?

I would query use of the phrase 'Permitting injustice to occur' - sounds very dramatic, but we're discussing vacuum cleaners and eBay, not child abuse, global terrorism, or some other issue which I feel to be important in the greater scheme of things. Obviously, with THOSE issues, you can't just shrug and agree to disagree, but I can't seriously equate those situations as being remotely similar to this.

How is agreeing to disagree helpful? It prevents disagreements carrying on ad infititum. Perhaps I'm wrong with what I'm saying here. Maybe people posting eBay auctions on vacuumland is a life-and-death situation. I have no right to tell you that you're wrong in that, but I personally don't feel it is, and thus I won't commit to continuing a discussion I don't feel is constructive or helpful. It seems to have taken on a negative, argumentative tone which is simply irritating people. I don't see the benefit in dragging it out further.

Seeing as you clearly are committed to this issue - in not allowing your important point to be shouted down or controlled - can I ask you frankly, what you feel the outcome of all this important talk will be? Realistically, in 2 days, or 5 weeks, or 8 years, will the board have reached a conclusion? Will we have decided one way or the other about the etiquette of posting eBay auctions on vacuumland (which I believe was the original issue, it seems such a long way back...). Or will we just see a continuation of posts from a few people of differing opinions slugging it out, arguments and counter-arguments, while the majority of people on vacuumland have long since lost interest and patience? And if so, was it all worth it?

To demonstrate how easily the concept of 'agreeing to disagree' is put into practice, I shall demonstrate:

*shrug*

And that’ll be my last word on the subject. I’ve learnt that when one grabs for the last word, someone else will try the same, and the discussion would continue until the participants died or wore their fingers away typing. And I wouldn't want that, I have other things to do with my life. And my fingers.

.

Now that's a shrug if I ever saw one.

And that hat! (I'd trade my award winning twin motor Air-Way for the original that Joan is wearing!)

That is one woman that could possibly make a gay man straight for an afternoon...........

As was suggested, I have discreetly answered Jack's query "off thread." I can't promise I will always be discreet.

..and Ian, (ref Post #25832) are you sure it is okay to refer to someone as a ho "on thread"? Oh, wait a minute. Never mind.

and besides, tis the season.

You know damn well who Uncle Ho is...damn it Deckard if you're not cop you're little people

:P

Ahem, I jest..

Ah come on Jack, cold war paranoia is fun =p