PDA

View Full Version : Raffles



Marauderman
08-06-2007, 04:36 PM
So Participating paid vendors were not disallowed to participate.................in teresting.....and yet....win.....interesting.... somehow,,,,,,,,,,,,I am a confused person about alot of things..........oh well..........

SO I am still confused....am I correct in that a monthly(guess) paying vendor can enter a raffal for the big prize from another vendor competing in the same board/venue....and win the darn thing.............thats amazing....wow!..I personnally did not enter....cause I have all I need... .but it amazies me that vendors are not prohibited..so it would seem to maintain fairnesss....heck.....like I said-i did not enter....but I feel bad for all those non -vendors who did....hey folks--I have an opinion...and thats mind....or did I read in wrong....

MM03MOK
08-06-2007, 05:26 PM
So Participating paid vendors were not disallowed to participate.................in teresting.....and yet....win.....interesting.... somehow,,,,,,,,,,,,I am a confused person about alot of things..........oh well..........

SO I am still confused....am I correct in that a monthly(guess) paying vendor can enter a raffal for the big prize from another vendor competing in the same board/venue....and win the darn thing.............thats amazing....wow!..I personnally did not enter....cause I have all I need... .but it amazies me that vendors are not prohibited..so it would seem to maintain fairnesss....heck.....like I said-i did not enter....but I feel bad for all those non -vendors who did....hey folks--I have an opinion...and thats mind....or did I read in wrong....
Tom, I think you're hitting the bug juice again. Why should a vendor, who is also a Member, be treated differently than any other Member? Not sure what you mean by "competing" since John is not in the Power Adder business. John is a Member who happens to also be a vendor. All the drawings were fair and above board, in front of 56 people. I appreciate you sharing your opinion. There's nothing to be amazed about here.

Bradley G
08-06-2007, 05:53 PM
I'll have to admit, the owners and the vendors, should be exempt from the raffle. It has nothing to do with "lack of fairness", it is "conflict of interest". W T G John!

MM03MOK
08-06-2007, 06:12 PM
I'll have to admit, the owners and the vendors, should be exempt from the raffle. It has nothing to do with "lack of fairness", it is "conflict of interest". W T G John!
There were plenty of raffle tickets for anyone and everyone. FYI, we still had 16 vendor raffle tickets left. The two-fold focus of the raffles are to raise event funds and provide great prizes for our membership. Both were accomplished. I think that's very fair.

RCSignals
08-06-2007, 07:54 PM
I can see the perception of conflict of interest. Although if it is stated up front that ALL can participate there should be no surprises.
Often in situations like this people in that position will buy raffle tickets in support, but waive a win if pulled. At least in my past experience.

Ken
08-06-2007, 08:47 PM
I can see the perception of conflict of interest. Although if it is stated up front that ALL can participate there should be no surprises.
Often in situations like this people in that position will buy raffle tickets in support, but waive a win if pulled. At least in my past experience. Why is it a conflict of interest? Why should a member be disqualified just because he is a vendor too? If they buy their raffle tickets, they should be allowed to participate, just like anyone else. Interesting that no one at MV5 said anything, but people that didn't come, (and may not have even bought a raffle ticket) would have the nerve to have an issue. :rolleyes:

John and Marty bought their chances just like the rest of us, and were lucky enough to win, Congratulations, and Thank You to all of our sponsors and raffle ticket buyers for their support of MV5.

Ken

Breadfan
08-06-2007, 08:49 PM
The fact they weren't even sold out should pretty much quell this sort of argument before it gets going. No one there complained, it was fair and congrats go to John.

Please don't make another multi-page thread my mouse is getting worn out.

RCSignals
08-06-2007, 09:41 PM
Why is it a conflict of interest? Why should a member be disqualified just because he is a vendor too? If they buy their raffle tickets, they should be allowed to participate, just like anyone else. Interesting that no one at MV5 said anything, but people that didn't come, (and may not have even bought a raffle ticket) would have the nerve to have an issue. :rolleyes:

John and Marty bought their chances just like the rest of us, and were lucky enough to win, Congratulations, and Thank You to all of our sponsors and raffle ticket buyers for their support of MV5.

Ken

Ken, You quoted me but I don't think you necessarily meant to single out my post.

Since you did quote me, note I said "perception of conflict of interest."

This comes from the fact that often raffles tend to omit participation by vendors/companies/employees of such, and people are used to this scenario.

I also said "if it is stated up front that ALL can participate there should be no surprises." In this instance I think this was stated for this raffle.

So in this particular raffle, all should be OK.
It is a consideration though for future Raffles to ensure the rules are clear.

Bluerauder
08-07-2007, 04:14 AM
Why is it a conflict of interest? Why should a member be disqualified just because he is a vendor too? If they buy their raffle tickets, they should be allowed to participate, just like anyone else. Interesting that no one at MV5 said anything, but people that didn't come, (and may not have even bought a raffle ticket) would have the nerve to have an issue. :rolleyes:

John and Marty bought their chances just like the rest of us, and were lucky enough to win, Congratulations, and Thank You to all of our sponsors and raffle ticket buyers for their support of MV5.

Ken
Good points, Ken. Each and every ticket in the raffle basket had an equal chance of coming out a winner. My tickets were in there, too. No vendors were involved in the drawing process. The double blind nature of the drawing that I witnessed while there at the Farewell Breakfast makes it "doubly" fair and impartial. I see no Conflict of Interest or even the perception for that matter. Congrats to ALL of the winners and supporters of the raffle. :up:

knine
08-07-2007, 05:09 AM
But if the vendors were excluded then how would martyo get his fender badges ? :rolleyes: They're just like us, kids hoping to get some really kewl stuff from somebody else. YEA to all the vendors. Rock on !!

magindat
08-07-2007, 05:17 AM
So, are we saying that vendors, who gave more than any participant by donating the prize in the first place, should not be allowed to have a chance in the raffle?!

Be the vendor...
You give a prize to the raffle.
No credit other than advertising and 'good will'.

You buy a ticket to support the raffle.
No expectation to win, more of a 'support the cause' mentality.

You win in a double blind drawing right in front of all the other paying participants.

I'd say it's totally fair and even "karmatically just".

Congrats John, on your win. And thank you for supporting our site and 'club'.

Bradley G
08-07-2007, 05:18 AM
Consider a raffle, a donation. As was stated, some did not participate, in the raffle,or the event (for the record). It was not possible, at this time, to endorse either. By the thread starter, someone felt, it was a perceived conflict of interest. Is every member, entitled to have/voice an opinion? If not, disregard my comments. Who's idea was it, to have the first S/C raffle? Oh yeah, Mine! LOL

MM03MOK
08-07-2007, 05:26 AM
Yes, Bradley, every member is entitled to have/voice an opinion. Because of the "perception," I wanted us all to talk this out instead of brushing it under the carpet. That's how things should work. Take the "edge" out of the discussion all the way around and we can have meaningful exchanges. Bradley, you certainly know I am very approachable and reasonable.

Bradley G
08-07-2007, 05:51 AM
Yes you are, Bunny! As you know, many are not. Proof of this here, is not hard to find. To infer another member, is "bug juiced" (I assume you meant,not thinking straight)If he felt that the raffle, should not be for the people, that are here to profit, that is his opinion. My opinion, is somewhat similar, though Duncan, (RC Signals) stated it more clearly.(what's new) The perception, no matter how clear the rule(s) may be, is that if the "Powers win", the contest was slighted. I feel confident, that that is not the case here. But I feel, also, that natural tendency, If a contestant does not win,and a vendor or moderator wins ,the non winner suspects foul play. I think that is why, any contest, excludes the people directly involved, and their families.
Yes, Bradley, every member is entitled to have/voice an opinion. Because of the "perception," I wanted us all to talk this out instead of brushing it under the carpet. That's how things should work. Take the "edge" out of the discussion all the way around and we can have meaningful exchanges. Bradley, you certainly know I am very approachable and reasonable.

MM03MOK
08-07-2007, 05:58 AM
My "bug juice" comment was referring to Marauderman's post the other day. He actually said "happy juice" and I didn't recall that correctly. I was trying to use his own words.

ckadiddle
08-07-2007, 07:06 AM
I was unable to participate in the s/c raffle and Mville this time due to the expenses of getting married and honeymooning. I thank everyone, including vendors, who purchased tickets to all the raffles. They help keep mm.net alive, and that very directly benefits me.

Haggis
08-07-2007, 08:00 AM
If you buy a ticket(s) you should have an equal chance to win. John bought his ticket(s) and had as much of a chance as anyone else that purchased a ticket(s). His ticket was also drawn by an impartial attendee at MVV in front all that atended Sunday's breakfest.

SC Cheesehead
08-07-2007, 08:13 AM
I'll have to admit, the owners and the vendors, should be exempt from the raffle. It has nothing to do with "lack of fairness", it is "conflict of interest". W T G John!

Where's the conflict of interest?

John sells stereos, he entered, and won, a raffle for a supercharger. Am I missing something here?

SCCH

SILVERSURFER03
08-07-2007, 08:31 AM
I Was There And I Bought My Ticket For A Chance To Win But I Did Consider It More As A Donation For The Club. I Beleive It Was Fair And For All Those That Won Congrats. Vender Or Not. It Was A Great Time Really Nice People And Alot Of Fun.what More Could You Ask For. Great Job To Everone Who Put On Our Event.

KillJoy
08-07-2007, 09:13 AM
If I am not mistaken, and I am NOT in this matter, John purchased his THREE Raffle Tickets from Mary at the last Kentucky Meet. I was present. I saw it. This happened even before he offered up the NAV Unit.

If you think there is something fishy going on..... you, by far, are mistaken.

KillJoy

Breadfan
08-07-2007, 09:21 AM
Seems like this is resolved then.

Time to move on?

KillJoy
08-07-2007, 09:28 AM
Seems like this is resolved then.

Time to move on?


I could not agree more!

:beer:

KillJoy

SC Cheesehead
08-07-2007, 10:15 AM
I could not agree more!

:beer:

KillJoy


^^^^^ +2!! ^^^^^

SCCH

vkirkend
08-07-2007, 02:27 PM
I don't understand why a vendor should be excluded. In addition to making a donation of product they also make a donation of cash. There were still tickets left for all drawings. (I know I was there) I am happy for the winners (that includes me) and see no problem in the process. You can't win if you don't play. And John didn't even know he had won as he left right after the cruise. Even if all the tickets sold the selection process was more than fair. Me thinks thou doest protest to much....

BruteForce
08-07-2007, 04:27 PM
I think you all are looking at this from the wrong angle. It isn't who BUYS a ticket that might have a conflict of interest; it is who OFFICIATES the ticket handling process. That would be those who sell, handle, assign, and/or draw the tickets.

To have a process that does not give the perception of impropriety, you must have a disinterested 3rd party officiate the raffle process.

Bradley G
08-07-2007, 08:32 PM
I am as "objective" as possible, I could not join in the fun, at all! I know how (non winners) people act/feel, in a game of chance. I never, for a second implied anything, (dishonest) along those lines ocured. I am merely saying that, If you have anything to do with the raffle(vendor or official), you should not be eligible, to win anything. Otherwise (non winners), people can claim foul. Show us any sweepstakes, or drawing where the sponsor(s) or officials are eligible to win?

Haggis
08-08-2007, 05:17 AM
I think you all are looking at this from the wrong angle. It isn't who BUYS a ticket that might have a conflict of interest; it is who OFFICIATES the ticket handling process. That would be those who sell, handle, assign, and/or draw the tickets.

To have a process that does not give the perception of impropriety, you must have a disinterested 3rd party officiate the raffle process.


If you buy a ticket(s) you should have an equal chance to win. John bought his ticket(s) and had as much of a chance as anyone else that purchased a ticket(s). His ticket was also drawn by an impartial attendee at MVV in front all that atended Sunday's breakfest.

As stated an impartial attendee pulled the winning ticket in front of all at Sunday's breakfast.