... in the mass of material in my other message, the point of my query to Mark "What's Really Going On Here?" was an email he sent to Katie Smith (now being reproduced here with her consent):

-------------

From: Mark <OnlineDeals@lvcm.com>
To: Katie Smith <katies@cwia.com>
Date: Thursday, September 02, 1999 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: by the way

Hi,
I think he list as pero as a last name, something like that. Well, lets see if mark can cause some fire in the AM. I saw they already had a scam going about the Bond chips so, i did my dirty work too, had a few buds bid some mighty high bids on his auctions but, let's keep that private. They want to cost me money, I will cost them some in e-bay fee;s. <BG>
Mark

--------------

Please note the comment: "I DID MY DIRTY WORK TOO, HAD A FEW BUDS BID SOME MIGHTY HIGH BIDS ON HIS AUCTIONS BUT, LET'S KEEP THAT PRIVATE."

This was a direct reference to the huge bids placed on Steve Brock's James Bond chips auctions by two idiots whose names and email addresses proved to be false (can't remember them at the moment).

In legal terms, Mark's message to Katie was nothing short of a confession.

These two bids, for those who don't recall, followed the $999,999 bid on one of Mark's auctions, about which I posted the following message (available in Archive 2):

The $999,999.00 Bid on eBay chips ...

Posted By: Jim Reilly <RunTam@PacBell.net>

Date: 9/4/99 03:05

... is shameful. I hope it was not posted by anyone who is a regular here. The fact that the name came back to Steve Brock is disconcerting, though I don't for a minute doubt his denial of involvement. But, the fact that it was done in his name seems to indicate that the actual bidder is not only computer-savvy (I for example, would have no idea how to do such a thing), but also familiar with Steve (either through the club, the board or eBay). Interesting that this person also chose to sabotage Steve's auctions.

Mark Onlinedeals got off to a bad start with some posters here and hasn't made much headway, in the minds of some, in repairing the damage. Nevertheless, I thought he was making an honest effort to accommodate complaints made here and to make his auction descriptions fair and accurate.

Most of you know that I have no hesitation in calling out false, fraudulent or misleading eBay auction descriptions and that I have no compunctions about notifying bidders when sellers won't respond to complaints about such descriptions.

I do not, however, see anything appropriate or constructive in this action against "online"'s (and Steve's) auctions. As I said above, I hope it was not a regular here who did this; if so, I will be sorely disappointed.

----- jim o\-S

--------------- So, once again, judge for yourself whether or not I have been attempting to be completely fair to Mr. Mark Pugh. ----- jim o\-S