... on this issue, Archie, as well as the one I just posted to Peter Sanders.

I was not aware of the (UNPUBLISHED) "one bid" rule for sellers when I posted THE POINT. Furthermore, as I said in the post to Peter, if the rules don't prohibit shill bids, I wouldn't want the thankless task of trying to enforce an unwritten rule against them

HOW IS ANYONE SUPPOSED TO KNOW ABOUT THESE RULES?

>> Shill bidding (to me) means parties other than the consignor, and in concert with the consignor, placing bid(s) in an effort to drive up the final price of the item being offered as an end result. <<

What difference does it make if the seller does it himself or has someone else do it? Isn't the end result (a higher price) the same?

Anyway, all of this is beside THE POINT. I have (or at least, didn't think I had) any beef with the way the club auction is being conducted. My POINT was that we, as a group, were being hypocritical in our comments on the issue of seller "protection" or "shill" bidding. And frankly, I think we still are. As long as the bidders don't know that the sellers can bid on their own lots, I think we are permitting the functional equivalent of shill bidding no matter what we call it.

I do now realize that I have one complaint about the process -- the published rules for the club auction should specify that sellers are permitted one "protection" bid and that no seller third party (shill) bids are permitted. Then, at least, EVERYONE, not just the sellers and the auctioneer, will know what the rules are. ----- jim o\-S