Which is just about where I thought you might go Sea-to-Sky. =)  You equated personal value again with actual value.  Two very different things.  While both have commonalities, they are not the same.  I think maybe your confusing actual market value with consumer demand pricing.  Both have an impact on the other but are not the same and have different driving forces (or defining elements as it were).

It gets back down to the root, "If someone is willing to pay a certain amount of money for something, does that amount equate to value?"  No, Sea it doesnt.  It looks like it does, but that consumer driven price is not based on actual value, but rather a factor of other influences or values.

Let me give you an example.  PSP3's.  If what your saying were true, Sony's production line is worth some serious cash.  Why, because look.  All those parents at christmas who shelled out serious bucks to get their hands on a PSP3 made it worth hundreds if not thousands of dollars.  Wow, Sony really is gonna clean up on that baby.

Oh wait, Sony isnt going to change their price?  Nope, because the PSP3 is not worth what people were paying.  People were paying for something entirely different, the smiles on their kids faces (to use a generality).  Thats the value, not the PSP3.

When people here say, "That Tsoj is waaaaay overpriced and not worth 2k!"  they are correct.  Its not.  However, someone, somewhere just has to have it because she remembered her husband played it way back when and it was his favorite dungeon, and quite frankly, money is not an issue for them.  So she buys it.  Worth every penny to her because her husbands joy is just that, worth every penny.  The module...well, its worth what its worth...exactly what the community at large evaluates its current market value to be.

Hope I cleared that up for ya. =)

*edited for some seriouslly horrible sentence structure, my appologies*

Sea-to-sky-games wrote:

I don't know. It seemed like the conversation hasn't been forced. I've just been responding to questions or comments made by others. I figure it would be rude not to.

If I can persuade some people, fine, but I wasn't aware there were site regulations on what constitutes an interesting discussion. Is there, like, higher costs for the admin the longer the thread?

You are missing the point of my comment.   The only thing that you are doing by continually beating the dead is horse is to piss people off and insult thier intellignece.  Assuming that everything that you said here so far is absolutely 100% correct(I am not saying that I believe it is mind you), but sooner or later if you keep telling people they are wrong and you are right, it is only going to lead to one thing: Pissed off people and hard feelings. Being 100% honest with you I can say that that is really starting to be the case....

they are wrong and you are right, it is only going to lead to one thing: Pissed off people and hard feelings. Being 100% honest with you I can say that that is really starting to be the case....

I disagree. The hard feelings came the very moment I chimed in on the subject (c.f. all the insults I've dealt with). But you are free to characterize the situation as you see fit.

...and Sea-to-sky-games is still...
...trollin, trollin, trollin...
...dont let this troll keep trollin...
...so ban him, ban him, ban him...
...Lord Foul!!

bclarkie wrote:With all due respect Ian, there is a lot of what you think that a majority of the board does not see eye to eye with.  As with everyone else, you are most certainly entilted to your own opinion on the matter and I would never attempt to take that away from you. I am quite happy to agree to disagree.  

That said, even though you do disagree with what most of what everyone else here thinks, you also have not gone out of your way to try and cram your own opinions on the matter down everyone elses throats either, regardless of what it is.   The same cannot be said for our new found friend here.

I wanted to add on to this post as I realized that it came across kind of casutic and that was not my intent.   Regardless of the issues at hand your opinion is and should be valued as whether or not it is the same as others on the board does not mean that you are wrong and I am sorry Ian if my post implied this.  

My point was that I was trying to indicate that everyone is allowed to disagree on any and every issue if they want for that, the problem comes in when posters try to force their opinions on eveybody else on the site(especially new ones) and then get upset when eveyone isn't just falling all over themselves to praise them for thier genius.

Sea-to-sky-games wrote:
By definition, when one ventures an opinion that goes against the grain there has to be some semblance of "this is right for this reason, this is wrong for that reason." Do you not agree? Can you have a conversation with people that have differences of opinion without telling someone -- "I disagree with you (i.e. I think you're wrong) and here's why.." Impossible.

The one thing that I have not done is resort to personal attacks or put anyone in a negative light by characterizing their intentions, motives, or personal history. Yet this is precisely what I've experienced from many others. I can only think that means that some are not comfortable talking about some of their long held beliefs when they get challenged.

If you disagree with me fine, but there's no need to resort to putting someone down.

Umm, I could cite about 10 different circumstances where you have been blatanly rude to people but I won't as its not worth my time.  To save myself some time, I will just point to the most recent circumstance where you blatantly rude to someone:

Sea-to-sky-games wrote:
This is nonsense. Buyers mistakenly assess the condition of the item for sale; buyers mistakenly assess the length of shipping to their location; buyers mistake the investment value of a good; buyers sometimes buy things they already have; buyers even make mistakes working out currency differences (although eBay does compute this automatically when the user's prefs are defined, although not shipping costs).

The reason why mistakes occur is because it is costly for buyers to obtain perfect information. And even if perfect information were available, the price would reflect that (ie. buyers would bid more).

The seller can't be held accountable for buyer mistakes just as buyers can't be held accountable for seller mistakes (or bad entrepreneurial decisions).

I guess the only thing I wanted to add to this conversation is that exchange on eBay is voluntary. With the obvious exception of fraud, if one doesn't like the practices, the high prices, or whatever of a certain seller, you are free not to buy from them.

I do not know where you come from, but where I come from when you tell someone that what they write is nonsense, that is about as RUDE AND CONDESCENDING as you can get.  Perhaps you should start shining that light on yourself before making the accusations on others.

Sea-to-sky-games wrote:
Then what is value?

For a long time people felt that the value of a good was based on how much labor or effort was put into making it, then add in some value for the cost of the capital equipment necessary to produce it, then throw in some profit/rent on top of that. Maybe some objective practical usage of the good can be thrown in.

But that theory of value cannot (and did not) explain why people value things the way they do.

Only subjective judgement can determine value, least if the term is to have any useful meaning.

Again, your getting off on the tangent of value based on other things, not actual item value.  Your adding (or subtracting as it were) value due to other factors not based on basic merit (as defined by some of your parameters in the first paragraph).  Its pretty much apples and oranges...the only problem is you keep saying "But its fruit!"  and I keep saying "Of course its fruit, its just different fruit!" =)

Seperate the individuals value from the item (based on any number of things).  Thats where your getting confused.

Again, your getting off on the tangent of value based on other things, not actual item value.  Your adding (or subtracting as it were) value due to other factors not based on basic merit (as defined by some of your parameters in the first paragraph).  Its pretty much apples and oranges...the only problem is you keep saying "But its fruit!"  and I keep saying "Of course its fruit, its just different fruit!" =)

Seperate the individuals value from the item (based on any number of things).  Thats where your getting confused.

You suggest value is not subjective, but I'm scratching my head trying to figure out what instead you think it is.

Well, if it makes you feel any better, I think that I am done now.

What.. Don't you see I'm trying to become a 'prolific collector' in one thread?!