Mountain Bru

I wish the admins would clarify what the real story is and when it's appropriate to rate each other. But based on the content on this thread, I would say the feedback should be removed.

In all the excitement, it's easy to forget that Pogacar is 5:39 ahead of Jonas

Overall a good day for him. Uran is out of contention, and he took a few seconds on Carapaz.

Jonas is such a legend

He attacked with like 1km to go on Ventoux. Maybe he's planning on doing the same and going for the win

Na I think Carapaz is cooked, just like on Ventoux

Vingegaard having the ride of his life

If he makes it to Paris it'll be an achievement. Seems it's a game of "last man standing" at TJV, and he has to beat WVA to win.

If you have a look at the terms of use here: https://forum.bikehub.co.za/docs/terms_of_use/ It says this: "Ratings and feedback should only be submitted in the event that an agreement to transact was made. We reserve the right to remove feedback which relates to negotiations or communications where there was no agreement and/or a transaction did not take place." I guess there's a few grey areas depending on how you understand things, so maybe we're both right, or both wrong. ????‍♂️ If replying "yes" to a message saying "Can I buy your bicycle" constitutes an "agreement to transact", then you can rate the guy according to the terms of service (and also take them to court if they don't buy your bicycle apparently). But then it says that you can't rate people where "there was no agreement and/or a transaction did not take place", which maybe contradicts the the first sentence. ????‍♂️ If there was an agreement, but no transaction took place, then bikehub can remove the feedback? If you remove the "and/or" from the 2nd sentence and replace it with just "or" (which I think is a valid thing to do in the context), it seems the admins will remove feedback where there was no agreement OR if a transaction did not take place. I dunno. Can the team of legal experts please advice. But it's clear you shouldn't be rating people because they were rude in a message or you didn't like their tone or they asked if they could look at something and never pitched. Or if the kangaroo court was in session on a thread where someone was airing their grievances, and then everyone on the thread decided to give someone a bad rating as judgement for being a chop (which has happened, but I think people saw the light and deleted their feedback if I remember correctly)

Solo break by Skujins. Or sprint between Matthews and Colbrelli

85km down, no real break formed. Another day of chaos

Kwiato is free.....

Just a little ride into Paris.... Wee day out....

Dibs ???? (Not really. Please don't take me to court. This is not a contract. I reserve the right to not be sued)

You seem to be a knowledgeable lawyer type person, so can you answer some other questions on this matter.... 1. Does a whatsapp chat really constitute a legal contract? Or a bikehub messanger chat? Or an email? What about saying something on a forum? My greatness. Why do we bother signing things? 2. This is all written from the perspective of the buyer not being able to buy something he's "contractually" entitled to. Do the same rules apply in reverse? Like if someone says they'll take something, and then changes their mind, can I demand that they pay me and take them to court? 3. Howcome Takealot can cancel my order AFTER I've paid and refund me the money if they decide not to sell something to me, but on bikehub, you can be taken to court, or worse - teased on forums - if you do the same? Seems like a double standard.

Nope, thats not the way the rating system works (or is supposed to work). You have to actually buy something or sell something in order to rate someone. If one party backs out and nothing has changed hands, you shouldn't rate each other according to the "rules of the rating system".

Based on the stories from the seller on that other thread bitching about the classifieds, this might be for sale for longer than the historic steel fork siblings: https://bikehub.co.za/classifieds/item/road-bike-forks/474758/colnago-steel-fork

Can admin please offer a course in "how to not end up in court when using the classifieds"? Maybe the solution to all of this drama is to put a generic message at the end of every ad to protect yourself. Something like: "First come first served. I reserve the right to not sell stuff to you if your post count or rating is too low, or if you've been known to be a box in the forums. Nothing I say in a message constitutes a deal, only cash in my hand constitutes a deal. If you want me to hold something for you, I want a deposit. If I don't respond to your messages, it might be because I do other things apart from selling crap on bikehub, please be patient before starting a forum post bitching at me. If you lowball me, I probably won't answer for fear of accidentally entering into a contract with you and ending up in court. I cycle for leisure, and sell stuff to clear up clutter in my house, please don't take me to court. If you don't like my terms, feel free to not do business with me, just please don't take me to court"

Apparently his entourage is like 20 people that he wants to take with him. Realistically, his only real options are smaller teams that will be happy to have him take over their team.

Maybe the tactics handbook is the real reason they bought Carapaz. Suddenly all the "we're gonna race differently" stuff they've been saying makes a lot more sense.

I think this is a good list. You can add Haig to the "New kid" list too I think. I reckon he would have been up there too this year if he hadn't crashed out. Lopez is nowhere right now, but he's also been a consistent GC contender over the years. Quintana and Uran maybe also Tier 3? Also Dumoulin if his form is similar to previous years. And Pinot & Bardet on Tier 4. Regardless of who we think is in the "Top 10 GC contender" list at the moment though, my comment stands that this sure as hell isn't a list of the top 10 GC riders in the world: (Current GC top 10)

So in your mind, the buyer has to pay you R10 000 no matter what. Even if he looks at the bike and changes his mind, or decides he's not happy or something else comes up on his side, a deal is a deal and he must pay?

In fairness to Nico, I've had the "we had a deal and then you sold it to someone else" story happen to me before, and I guess it does suck if you're emotionally invested in buying something. But it's also par for the course on the current "classifieds-driven-website". My approach is to take all the messages and arrangements with a pinch of salt until someone either sends me their bank details and lets me pay, or until I'm standing in front of the dude with the thing in my hands. It saves you a lot of heartache if you don't falsely assume something is yours before you pay for it.