Target Online Sales Thread

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by molly1984

so this thread is for Target stock discussions only?

the other thread is strictly for Target stock alerts? https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1466895

and then another thread is only for walmart and other store stock info? https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1466591

I saw the other main post we used to have got shut down so just trying to keep track of what's goin on here. now yall are having me check 3 places for info

This thread is for arguing about the ethics and morality of using bots.

[jkampis]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

Sorry it's over your head.

Heh, yeah, that’s surely the reason.

[Archimedes]

Originally Posted by jkampis

Heh, yeah, that’s surely the reason.

You know, since you couldn't understand the argument and all... it's ok. Logic isn't for everyone.

[BRob1]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

You know, since you couldn't understand the argument and all... it's ok. Logic isn't for everyone.

It’s just a dumb comparison. you are saying that target asking you to limit your purchase to 3 items online is somehow unethical on their part and should not be adhered to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lurker]

Good evening. Not a popular opinion but I miss grabbing a fat pack at Target when doing grocery pickup for my old lady. It was my only motivation and now I’m stuck going to get the damn groceries still.

I have enjoyed the forums for awhile. Just had to give my two cents. ��

[molly1984]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

This thread is for arguing about the ethics and morality of using bots.

Thanks for keeping me straight lol

[MiamiMarlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Good evening. Not a popular opinion but I miss grabbing a fat pack at Target when doing grocery pickup for my old lady.

That’s a very popular opinion. That’s, like, 90% of the members here. The other 10% are bots.

[Lurker]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

That’s a very popular opinion. That’s, like, 90% of the members here. The other 10% are bots.

Oh. At times it would appear retail rippers are viewed as clowns. Glad to be corrected!

[molly1984]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Oh. At times it would appear retail rippers are viewed as clowns. Glad to be corrected!

Times have changed, i feel you lol. i too used to buy retail when it was looked at as a waste of money.

[Archimedes]

Originally Posted by BRob1

It’s just a dumb comparison. you are saying that target asking you to limit your purchase to 3 items online is somehow unethical on their part and should not be adhered to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm just saying that a rule doesn't necessarily establish an ethical guideline. So, adherence to a rule doesn't necessarily imply anything about ethics. Certainly, some rules have strong moral foundations. There are laws forbidding murder. We can all agree that the rule serves a moral purpose and violating it would be wrong. But it's wrong because murder is wrong - not because there's a rule forbidding murder. Similarly, arguing that it's unethical to do Action X simply because someone made a rule telling you not to do Action X is silly. It all depends on the nature of Action X.

[ewokpelts]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Oh. At times it would appear retail rippers are viewed as clowns. Glad to be corrected!

Dude, we ALL go to target just for cards.

[Hoopscardz83]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm just saying that a rule doesn't necessarily establish an ethical guideline. So, adherence to a rule doesn't necessarily imply anything about ethics. Certainly, some rules have strong moral foundations. There are laws forbidding murder. We can all agree that the rule serves a moral purpose and violating it would be wrong. But it's wrong because murder is wrong - not because there's a rule forbidding murder. Similarly, arguing that it's unethical to do Action X simply because someone made a rule telling you not to do Action X is silly. It all depends on the nature of Action X.

Wow your stretching for something. Very weak argument using the word murder in this argument is grasping for straws. Using bots is an ethics issue. Especially because these bot tools think they're entrepreneurs running a business. These are the guys who would get fired for some kind of theft.

[IlliniBear]

I’m thinking about going to Wally tomorrow at 7 am to see what’s in stock.

[BRob1]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm just saying that a rule doesn't necessarily establish an ethical guideline. So, adherence to a rule doesn't necessarily imply anything about ethics. Certainly, some rules have strong moral foundations. There are laws forbidding murder. We can all agree that the rule serves a moral purpose and violating it would be wrong. But it's wrong because murder is wrong - not because there's a rule forbidding murder. Similarly, arguing that it's unethical to do Action X simply because someone made a rule telling you not to do Action X is silly. It all depends on the nature of Action X.

rather than talking about hypotheticals we are talking about a specific situation.

most people are saying they find circumventing target policy, which is intended to ensure fair distribution of product to as many customers as possible, in attempt to middle man as much of the product as possible to the actual end user for profit unethical. I find that hard to argue with.

sure it’s not illegal but when target tells you they only want you to buy x of a certain item and you actively try to find ways to deceive them, yeah that sounds unethical. honestly hard to even have a conversation if you don’t get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Archimedes]

Originally Posted by Hoopscardz83

Wow your stretching for something. Very weak argument using the word murder in this argument is grasping for straws. Using bots is an ethics issue. Especially because these bot tools think they're entrepreneurs running a business. These are the guys who would get fired for some kind of theft.

Since my argument is "very weak," please help me understand yours. Specifically, please explain your proposition that using a bot is "especially" unethical since users think they're entrepreneurs running a business. I'd like to understand the connection between one's thought that he or she is an entrepreneur and one's moral compass. Also, please explain to me how these guys would get fired for theft. What are they stealing? I look forward to your response.

[Archimedes]

Originally Posted by BRob1

rather than talking about hypotheticals we are talking about a specific situation.

most people are saying they find circumventing target policy, which is intended to ensure fair distribution of product to as many customers as possible, in attempt to middle man as much of the product as possible to the actual end user for profit unethical. I find that hard to argue with.

sure it’s not illegal but when target tells you they only want you to buy x of a certain item and you actively try to find ways to deceive them, yeah that sounds unethical. honestly hard to even have a conversation if you don’t get that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hear what you're saying, but it's your second to last point that's key to my argument. What's the actual ethical threshold? Is it 3 products? Is it 5? Maybe 1? And is this per day or per week? Per month? It's all arbitrary.

If the goal, as you said, is fair distribution of product, then how is the person who adheres to the limit of, say, 3 products per day -- but buys 3 products per day, 7 days per week -- more ethical than the person who buys 4 products on a single day but only does so once per week? Although he's adhering to the guideline, Person 1 is impinging on the fair distribution of product much more so than is Person 2.

This all goes back to what I was saying above. Someone's ethics isn't a function of whether he or she follows or breaks a rule. It depends on (1) the nature of the rule itself and (2) whether he or she is acting in a way that's consistent with the spirit of that rule. In my example, I don't think Person 2 is unethical for buying 4 products per week vs Person 1, who buys 21 products. Do you disagree?

[BRob1]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

I hear what you're saying, but it's your second to last point that's key to my argument. What's the actual ethical threshold? Is it 3 products? Is it 5? Maybe 1? And is this per day or per week? Per month? It's all arbitrary.

If the goal, as you said, is fair distribution of product, then how is the person who adheres to the limit of, say, 3 products per day -- but buys 3 products per day, 7 days per week -- more ethical than the person who buys 4 products on a single day but only does so once per week? Although he's adhering to the guideline, Person 1 is impinging on the fair distribution of product much more so than is Person 2.

This all goes back to what I was saying above. Someone's ethics isn't a function of whether he or she follows or breaks a rule. It depends on (1) the nature of the rule itself and (2) whether he or she is acting in a way that's consistent with the spirit of that rule. In my example, I don't think Person 2 is unethical for buying 4 products per week vs Person 1, who buys 21 products. Do you disagree?

It’s not a matter of you deciding personally what you think the limit should be. They told you it’s 3 online and 1 in store. That’s it. There’s not much debate after that. If you don’t like it you don’t shop there, you don’t say i know better than them what the limit should be so i’ll do what I want.

This is a pretty pointless debate, i’m gonna bow out. You are one guy out of 100 that seems to want to argue whether they should have to follow the limit or not. If they’ve set a limit and you find ways to sneak around it and convince yourself you have some moral high ground while you’re doing it that’s insanity.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Doc Awesome]

So, how will this work if cards aren’t available to purchase online at target but they’re not showing in stores...Are you guys showing up at target tomorrow morning asking about cards?

[PSA2Pac]

Originally Posted by Doc Awesome

So, how will this work if cards aren’t available to purchase online at target but they’re not showing in stores...Are you guys showing up at target tomorrow morning asking about cards?

No lol

Literally told us they're not selling in store at the moment

If no online restock then theres nothing anybody can do

[Archimedes]

Originally Posted by BRob1

It’s not a matter of you deciding personally what you think the limit should be. They told you it’s 3 online and 1 in store. That’s it. There’s not much debate after that. If you don’t like it you don’t shop there, you don’t say i know better than them what the limit should be so i’ll do what I want.

This is a pretty pointless debate, i’m gonna bow out. You are one guy out of 100 that seems to want to argue whether they should have to follow the limit or not. If they’ve set a limit and you find ways to sneak around it and convince yourself you have some moral high ground while you’re doing it that’s insanity.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well now you’re backtracking. I thought the whole idea was to ensure as many as people as possible get product. But now you’re saying that following their guidance is the ethical priority. So by that logic, it was fine when bots ate up all the inventory before Target put any limits in place because without those limits, any and all actions were acceptable. I disagree with that because I don’t think Target is the moral arbiter. We should have our own set of ethics regardless of Target’s limits or the lack thereof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jkampis]

Originally Posted by Archimedes

Well now you’re backtracking. I thought the whole idea was to ensure as many as people as possible get product. But now you’re saying that following their guidance is the ethical priority. So by that logic, it was fine when bots ate up all the inventory before Target put any limits in place because without those limits, any and all actions were acceptable. I disagree with that because I don’t think Target is the moral arbiter. We should have our own set of ethics regardless of Target’s limits or the lack thereof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now you are finally getting it. Before you seemed to be tying ethics to a store’s rules, but folks can be slimy without breaking the rules: such as the guy who dumped a whole carton of Select hangers and blasters in his cart at a local Walmart last week with a 12-year-old kid standing directly behind him waiting to get some. Everyone has to decide to what level their own moral code goes, regardless of a store’s rules.

[wxguy44]

Something new was finally added! (not available though)

https://www.target.com/p/2021-nfl-sa...60#lnk=sametab

[mcb0419]

Originally Posted by wxguy44

Something new was finally added! (not available though)

https://www.target.com/p/2021-nfl-sa...60#lnk=sametab

I bought one of those Walgreens repacks and I was surprised that it included three cards from this, including a Trey Lance. Doesn’t seem to be much resale value in base, are autos an easy pull from these?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[theThrill22]

Originally Posted by mcb0419

I bought one of those Walgreens repacks and I was surprised that it included three cards from this, including a Trey Lance. Doesn’t seem to be much resale value in base, are autos an easy pull from these?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Curious as to what the other cards were you pulled? Micah Parsons by chance?

I bought the same repack and pulled a Lance and a few others, saw the same exact cards I pulled on ebay.

[Raleigh504]

https://www.target.com/p/2021-topps-...02#lnk=sametab