[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]

Don’t you think that listing prices are a little low then? [/quote]
Possibly.
Short sales are by definition less desirable in non-price terms.
It is generally necessary to lower the price to create interest.
[quote=SD Squatter]Is the goal here to get a bidding war going and close on the first day? [/quote]
That would be great but is, for the most part, impossible.
The bank needs to approve the purchase and usually takes months to do that.
Therefore opening escrow (let alone closing escrow) is usually months away.
[quote=SD Squatter]I’m just missing the logic here…, why the rush?[/quote]
It is important to get offers quickly because, as the agent (or short sale consultant), you need a buyer with an offer to even begin working the deal with the bank to get an approval and open escrow.

The concept of rushing just does not enter into it.

The irony is that these take months and are called “short” sales.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]

Don’t you think that listing prices are a little low then? [/quote]
Possibly.
Short sales are by definition less desirable in non-price terms.
It is generally necessary to lower the price to create interest.
[quote=SD Squatter]Is the goal here to get a bidding war going and close on the first day? [/quote]
That would be great but is, for the most part, impossible.
The bank needs to approve the purchase and usually takes months to do that.
Therefore opening escrow (let alone closing escrow) is usually months away.
[quote=SD Squatter]I’m just missing the logic here…, why the rush?[/quote]
It is important to get offers quickly because, as the agent (or short sale consultant), you need a buyer with an offer to even begin working the deal with the bank to get an approval and open escrow.

The concept of rushing just does not enter into it.

The irony is that these take months and are called “short” sales.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: When you add in the gloating and “inappropriate” Twitters and messages that the author confesses to following the termination of the offending poster, it starts to look like something else entirely.

Especially given that there were other, off-color comments made that were NOT flagged or deleted, nor did those posters find themselves out of work as a result.

As to the author’s assertion, “Well, it was a school…”: I find that utterly disingenuous and self serving, even more given the post-facto, almost mea culpa nature of the writing.

We should all refrain from being jerkwads, no doubt about it, but we all (myself definitely included) find ourselves posting comments that we look back on and cringe over.

That being said, the punishment needs to fit the offense and this was certainly beyond the pale.[/quote]

Yeah.
Well put.
The sheer dickishness of the proprietor was what made the sympathy so lopsided in that situation.

And yeah some comments I put would best be replaced by sharks.

Edit: also, I am not sure that Kurt Greenbaum was the proprietor per se.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: When you add in the gloating and “inappropriate” Twitters and messages that the author confesses to following the termination of the offending poster, it starts to look like something else entirely.

Especially given that there were other, off-color comments made that were NOT flagged or deleted, nor did those posters find themselves out of work as a result.

As to the author’s assertion, “Well, it was a school…”: I find that utterly disingenuous and self serving, even more given the post-facto, almost mea culpa nature of the writing.

We should all refrain from being jerkwads, no doubt about it, but we all (myself definitely included) find ourselves posting comments that we look back on and cringe over.

That being said, the punishment needs to fit the offense and this was certainly beyond the pale.[/quote]

Yeah.
Well put.
The sheer dickishness of the proprietor was what made the sympathy so lopsided in that situation.

And yeah some comments I put would best be replaced by sharks.

Edit: also, I am not sure that Kurt Greenbaum was the proprietor per se.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: When you add in the gloating and “inappropriate” Twitters and messages that the author confesses to following the termination of the offending poster, it starts to look like something else entirely.

Especially given that there were other, off-color comments made that were NOT flagged or deleted, nor did those posters find themselves out of work as a result.

As to the author’s assertion, “Well, it was a school…”: I find that utterly disingenuous and self serving, even more given the post-facto, almost mea culpa nature of the writing.

We should all refrain from being jerkwads, no doubt about it, but we all (myself definitely included) find ourselves posting comments that we look back on and cringe over.

That being said, the punishment needs to fit the offense and this was certainly beyond the pale.[/quote]

Yeah.
Well put.
The sheer dickishness of the proprietor was what made the sympathy so lopsided in that situation.

And yeah some comments I put would best be replaced by sharks.

Edit: also, I am not sure that Kurt Greenbaum was the proprietor per se.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: When you add in the gloating and “inappropriate” Twitters and messages that the author confesses to following the termination of the offending poster, it starts to look like something else entirely.

Especially given that there were other, off-color comments made that were NOT flagged or deleted, nor did those posters find themselves out of work as a result.

As to the author’s assertion, “Well, it was a school…”: I find that utterly disingenuous and self serving, even more given the post-facto, almost mea culpa nature of the writing.

We should all refrain from being jerkwads, no doubt about it, but we all (myself definitely included) find ourselves posting comments that we look back on and cringe over.

That being said, the punishment needs to fit the offense and this was certainly beyond the pale.[/quote]

Yeah.
Well put.
The sheer dickishness of the proprietor was what made the sympathy so lopsided in that situation.

And yeah some comments I put would best be replaced by sharks.

Edit: also, I am not sure that Kurt Greenbaum was the proprietor per se.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: When you add in the gloating and “inappropriate” Twitters and messages that the author confesses to following the termination of the offending poster, it starts to look like something else entirely.

Especially given that there were other, off-color comments made that were NOT flagged or deleted, nor did those posters find themselves out of work as a result.

As to the author’s assertion, “Well, it was a school…”: I find that utterly disingenuous and self serving, even more given the post-facto, almost mea culpa nature of the writing.

We should all refrain from being jerkwads, no doubt about it, but we all (myself definitely included) find ourselves posting comments that we look back on and cringe over.

That being said, the punishment needs to fit the offense and this was certainly beyond the pale.[/quote]

Yeah.
Well put.
The sheer dickishness of the proprietor was what made the sympathy so lopsided in that situation.

And yeah some comments I put would best be replaced by sharks.

Edit: also, I am not sure that Kurt Greenbaum was the proprietor per se.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]I wonder how widespread this sham is in San Diego area. It seems that quite a few listings appear to be placed “on ice”, typically listed as “not accepting any more offers at this time”or “pending” and that on the first day a property is listed. And then there are these “mailbox full” answering machines…[/quote]

My short sale listings generally go contingent or pending the first day.

That cuz they are cheap and get lots of offers.

I try (but fail) to return all my calls on these.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]I wonder how widespread this sham is in San Diego area. It seems that quite a few listings appear to be placed “on ice”, typically listed as “not accepting any more offers at this time”or “pending” and that on the first day a property is listed. And then there are these “mailbox full” answering machines…[/quote]

My short sale listings generally go contingent or pending the first day.

That cuz they are cheap and get lots of offers.

I try (but fail) to return all my calls on these.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]I wonder how widespread this sham is in San Diego area. It seems that quite a few listings appear to be placed “on ice”, typically listed as “not accepting any more offers at this time”or “pending” and that on the first day a property is listed. And then there are these “mailbox full” answering machines…[/quote]

My short sale listings generally go contingent or pending the first day.

That cuz they are cheap and get lots of offers.

I try (but fail) to return all my calls on these.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]I wonder how widespread this sham is in San Diego area. It seems that quite a few listings appear to be placed “on ice”, typically listed as “not accepting any more offers at this time”or “pending” and that on the first day a property is listed. And then there are these “mailbox full” answering machines…[/quote]

My short sale listings generally go contingent or pending the first day.

That cuz they are cheap and get lots of offers.

I try (but fail) to return all my calls on these.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Squatter]I wonder how widespread this sham is in San Diego area. It seems that quite a few listings appear to be placed “on ice”, typically listed as “not accepting any more offers at this time”or “pending” and that on the first day a property is listed. And then there are these “mailbox full” answering machines…[/quote]

My short sale listings generally go contingent or pending the first day.

That cuz they are cheap and get lots of offers.

I try (but fail) to return all my calls on these.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano]Well here’s how I see it.

I have this little website, that I consider myself the proprietor of given that I started it and put a lot of work into it and pay for for the dedicated server that it’s hosted on. If someone comes here and acts like a total jerkwad, I will ban them, and I don’t really feel much need to explain myself or cite laws or terms of use or constitutional amendments because you know what? Don’t act like a jerkwad. (And if the ban-ee differs with my definition of jerkwad, I refer them back to the part about me being the proprietor of this site, which is to say that I get to pick the definition).

Now, the example you cited, where the dude actually called the guy’s employers — that is something different. (Notwithstanding the idiocy of posting such stuff from work). You say “People get banned or people get tracked down and sued or something similar.” — I say, there is a big difference between getting banned (no big deal, just find a different site to be obnoxious on) and getting sued or fired, which is a major negative vis-a-vis one’s real, offline life.

Rich[/quote]

See the problem with that distinction is that some people don’t have much of a life outside their preferred blog (eg: cafeluv aka marion aka urbanrealtor). For them, being banned is as devastating as being fired or divorced. Not that I am projecting.

On a more serious point, I don’t think its that anyone disputes the definition of “jerkwad”, its that nobody knows what it is (and to be clear that’s not something that is peculiar to this site). I think thats the one of the issues in the example cited. If the site referenced had stated that “pussy” would be deleted and the ip addy used to track back then it would be a bit less of a controversy. There were several other references to cunnilingus in the blog that did not get deleted (and presumably not tracked).

You have a good point about the difference in consequences but the obfuscation of guidelines is still an issue. That’s what I find the most interesting part. The utterly insane consequences are what drew it into stark relief.

My 2 bits.

edit: and for the record, I don’t see any easy or really ready solution to this.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano]Well here’s how I see it.

I have this little website, that I consider myself the proprietor of given that I started it and put a lot of work into it and pay for for the dedicated server that it’s hosted on. If someone comes here and acts like a total jerkwad, I will ban them, and I don’t really feel much need to explain myself or cite laws or terms of use or constitutional amendments because you know what? Don’t act like a jerkwad. (And if the ban-ee differs with my definition of jerkwad, I refer them back to the part about me being the proprietor of this site, which is to say that I get to pick the definition).

Now, the example you cited, where the dude actually called the guy’s employers — that is something different. (Notwithstanding the idiocy of posting such stuff from work). You say “People get banned or people get tracked down and sued or something similar.” — I say, there is a big difference between getting banned (no big deal, just find a different site to be obnoxious on) and getting sued or fired, which is a major negative vis-a-vis one’s real, offline life.

Rich[/quote]

See the problem with that distinction is that some people don’t have much of a life outside their preferred blog (eg: cafeluv aka marion aka urbanrealtor). For them, being banned is as devastating as being fired or divorced. Not that I am projecting.

On a more serious point, I don’t think its that anyone disputes the definition of “jerkwad”, its that nobody knows what it is (and to be clear that’s not something that is peculiar to this site). I think thats the one of the issues in the example cited. If the site referenced had stated that “pussy” would be deleted and the ip addy used to track back then it would be a bit less of a controversy. There were several other references to cunnilingus in the blog that did not get deleted (and presumably not tracked).

You have a good point about the difference in consequences but the obfuscation of guidelines is still an issue. That’s what I find the most interesting part. The utterly insane consequences are what drew it into stark relief.

My 2 bits.

edit: and for the record, I don’t see any easy or really ready solution to this.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Rich Toscano]Well here’s how I see it.

I have this little website, that I consider myself the proprietor of given that I started it and put a lot of work into it and pay for for the dedicated server that it’s hosted on. If someone comes here and acts like a total jerkwad, I will ban them, and I don’t really feel much need to explain myself or cite laws or terms of use or constitutional amendments because you know what? Don’t act like a jerkwad. (And if the ban-ee differs with my definition of jerkwad, I refer them back to the part about me being the proprietor of this site, which is to say that I get to pick the definition).

Now, the example you cited, where the dude actually called the guy’s employers — that is something different. (Notwithstanding the idiocy of posting such stuff from work). You say “People get banned or people get tracked down and sued or something similar.” — I say, there is a big difference between getting banned (no big deal, just find a different site to be obnoxious on) and getting sued or fired, which is a major negative vis-a-vis one’s real, offline life.

Rich[/quote]

See the problem with that distinction is that some people don’t have much of a life outside their preferred blog (eg: cafeluv aka marion aka urbanrealtor). For them, being banned is as devastating as being fired or divorced. Not that I am projecting.

On a more serious point, I don’t think its that anyone disputes the definition of “jerkwad”, its that nobody knows what it is (and to be clear that’s not something that is peculiar to this site). I think thats the one of the issues in the example cited. If the site referenced had stated that “pussy” would be deleted and the ip addy used to track back then it would be a bit less of a controversy. There were several other references to cunnilingus in the blog that did not get deleted (and presumably not tracked).

You have a good point about the difference in consequences but the obfuscation of guidelines is still an issue. That’s what I find the most interesting part. The utterly insane consequences are what drew it into stark relief.

My 2 bits.

edit: and for the record, I don’t see any easy or really ready solution to this.

[Author]

Posts