Ever wanted to own...
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:08 pm
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:11 pm
LOL... I bet it's closed in the morning... ebay doesn't generally tolerate that kind of stuff.
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:58 pm
Man, this really is authentic! the scam ones only feature words, no drawings.This document will feature both drawings and words.
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 5:57 am
Bwhaha
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:29 am
Awesome! So far it's only $22.50 for getting the rights to the Brooklyn Bridge in the case that the seller ever is given the bridge by NYC. Not a bad deal. 
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:23 pm
You are bidding to purchase the Brooklyn Bridge which is located over the East River between Manhattan and Brooklyn.
The winning bidder will become the full owner of this historic bridge as far as I am concerned.
NOTE: Upon winning the auction you will not technically own the bridge as I have no authority to transfer those rights at this time. When the City of New York transfers ownership and authority over the historic Brooklyn Bridge to me I GUARANTEE I will immediately transfer those rights to you. Until the date of transference of ownership, the deed to the bridge will remain the property of the City of New York.
However, as acting owner you do have certain privileges. You will immediately be granted the the right to walk on the bridge all you want. You may tell people on the bridge that you are the boss. And you may drive over the historic Brooklyn Bridge as many times as you want without paying a toll.
Winner will receive a handwritten certificate from me declaring your future ownership as proof of purchase. This document will feature both drawings and words. Happy bidding!
lol!!
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 4:05 pm
Lol. People don't even own their cars. Like hell the State will give up a major bridge. 
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 4:10 pm
Thank you for quoting what we've already read...AceCombat wrote:You are bidding to purchase the Brooklyn Bridge which is located over the East River between Manhattan and Brooklyn.
The winning bidder will become the full owner of this historic bridge as far as I am concerned.
NOTE: Upon winning the auction you will not technically own the bridge as I have no authority to transfer those rights at this time. When the City of New York transfers ownership and authority over the historic Brooklyn Bridge to me I GUARANTEE I will immediately transfer those rights to you. Until the date of transference of ownership, the deed to the bridge will remain the property of the City of New York.
However, as acting owner you do have certain privileges. You will immediately be granted the the right to walk on the bridge all you want. You may tell people on the bridge that you are the boss. And you may drive over the historic Brooklyn Bridge as many times as you want without paying a toll.
Winner will receive a handwritten certificate from me declaring your future ownership as proof of purchase. This document will feature both drawings and words. Happy bidding!
lol!!
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:59 pm
Lothar wrote:LOL... I bet it's closed in the morning... ebay doesn't generally tolerate that kind of stuff.
its already been running for 6 days.
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:03 pm
The guy can't sell it as I bought it a while back.. 
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:18 pm
Hey! That can't be right!
Because when I sold it in 2003 - you were NOT the buyer!
Because when I sold it in 2003 - you were NOT the buyer!
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:15 pm
Closing in 1 hour, and it's at $99mil...
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:42 pm
The bridge is not worth that much. It's not worth the extra premium. I for one am going to build a bigger and better bridge right next to it!
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:15 pm
Slightly off-topic, but when I attempted to read the seller's feedback, I noticed this:
Does that sort of grammar irk anyone else coming from a giant corporation? Or is that to be expected.This member, tmr606, has decided to make their feedback comments private.
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:44 pm
Closed at $99,999,999... heh! Sucks to be that guy.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:09 pm
Haha... that's hilarious.
Now he's stuck with owing that $99mil.
Wonder what'll come of it.
Now he's stuck with owing that $99mil.
Wonder what'll come of it.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:47 pm
Good Lord - accusing them of getting it RIGHT isn't high on the list of "the smartest things Jeff250 has ever done" now is it?Jeff250 wrote:Slightly off-topic, but when I attempted to read the seller's feedback, I noticed this:Does that sort of grammar irk anyone else coming from a giant corporation? Or is that to be expected.This member, tmr606, has decided to make their feedback comments private.
Their use of "their" is entirely correct. "Their" is the possessive form, and not the geographic location of "there" - which would be incorrect.
What on earth did you go to school for man? To eat your lunch and chase girls by the look of it.
edit: it might be more correct to say "his" or "her", but that would mean adding a sex checkbox in the signup, and then a small piece of code to correctly display the right word for their (not "there"!) sex. In the absence of this, "their" is completely acceptable.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:22 pm
i want some of what hes having (points to above post) well maybe not 
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:35 pm
You know, I was almost thinking of posting a similar response, albeit in a more civilized fashion, but then I decided to just wait a day and give Mobi a chance to swing by to make one of his ever-endearing Grammar Nazi posts.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:42 pm
I wonder how this would hold up in court if the seller tried to sue the bidder for that amount. Some people are stupid like that.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:07 pm
Mobius, looks like you've narrowly saved yourself with the "edit."
The word "their" is a plural pronoun. The antecedent is singular-- "member." The pronoun and antecedent don't agree. If the gender is unknown, the proper usage would be "his or her" (together like that) or the gender default (although politically incorrect) "his." This is the way that I've always been instructed anyways, and I would lose credit on any paper that I wrote otherwise.
If you thought that this laxer sort of grammar was appropriate for the situation, then you should have responded to my question, "Or is that to be expected," which surprisingly you failed to do.
The word "their" is a plural pronoun. The antecedent is singular-- "member." The pronoun and antecedent don't agree. If the gender is unknown, the proper usage would be "his or her" (together like that) or the gender default (although politically incorrect) "his." This is the way that I've always been instructed anyways, and I would lose credit on any paper that I wrote otherwise.
If you thought that this laxer sort of grammar was appropriate for the situation, then you should have responded to my question, "Or is that to be expected," which surprisingly you failed to do.
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 6:33 pm
LMAO!! its gone now.
Invalid Item
Invalid Item