Page 13 of 24 FirstFirst ... 38910111213141516171823 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 468
  1. #241  
    Quote Originally Posted by nicegoogly
    The intent to give him a gift is in the eight e-mails he recieved where Sprint promised him that he had 100 dollars coming to him. Each e-mail promises that, so in effect, he entitled to all 800 dollars. There was no intent on mike's behalf to defraud Sprint. Their glitch is his gain. So to be "technical", he didn't ask for eight, the site sent it to him.
    Perhaps you are missing my point. He has to show that they intended to give him $400 for Treos he did not have. To use the example set forth by another member, if your bank accidently credits your bank account $1,000 and you claim it was a gift, it would be incredibly faulty logic to point to your bank statement where the $1,000 was recorded and say, "See? They intended to give it to me because it shows up in my statement." What you would have to show is that they intended you to have the $1,000. The mere fact that you're calling it a "glitch" shows that you understand it wasn't intended.

    There are 3 basic elements of a valid gift:

    1. The giving party must perform some act that constitutes the actual or symbolic delivery of the subject matter of the gift.

    2. The giving party must possess an unequivocal intent to give.

    3. The donee, or receiving party, must accept the gift.

    I hope now that it is clear that you are attempting to prove intent by showing delivery. The e-mails may qualify as the symbolic delivery of the gift. If anyone was arguing delivery, this would be quite a good response. However, to be 'technical' - the issue being discussed is #2 - Sprint or Handango's unequival intent to give. To that point, you have referred to a "glitch" - if the glitch was that Sprint did not intend to delivery the e-mails, then this isn't a gift because the 1st requirement is not met.

    You hit upon a crucial element of gift giving. It was not, however, the one being addressed.

    Tibby.
    J.D.
  2. dwman's Avatar
    Posts
    896 Posts
    Global Posts
    907 Global Posts
    #242  
    Good explanation, tiburon
  3. #243  
    Quote Originally Posted by dwman
    Good explanation, tiburon
    thank you.
  4. #244  
    First off, I wasn't directly quoting you, or even trying to. I was using examples of things people had done to defraud the site (yes, defraud) and therefore causing it to be shut down. That angered me, because I would never do something like that. The mere fact that you reacted the way you did (defensive and angry) PROVES you knew you'd done something wrong. Was I angry? Damn skippy! Was I being a "crybaby"? I don't think so. Did you react like any spoiled, emotionally bankrupt miscreant. Grow up.
    Go here if you're tired of being .
    It'll be fun.
  5. #245  
    Site's back up
  6. #246  
    And the validation has improved
  7. #247  
    Kudos to Handango and Sprint for not tossing out the baby with the bathwater
  8. #248  
    well said shopharim!
  9. #249  
    anyone able to legitimately get a code since the site has gone back up?
  10. #250  
    Nope. i was told that my phone number was invalid - even though I bought the sucker 15 days ago. Sent an email to the help link provided
  11. joe
    joe is offline
    joe's Avatar
    Posts
    87 Posts
    Global Posts
    103 Global Posts
    #251  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mungo4Prez
    Nope. i was told that my phone number was invalid - even though I bought the sucker 15 days ago. Sent an email to the help link provided
    Same for me. I sent an e-mail, too.
  12. #252  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mungo4Prez
    Nope. i was told that my phone number was invalid - even though I bought the sucker 15 days ago. Sent an email to the help link provided

    Me three
  13. #253  
    anyone can use the codes from before?
  14. #254  
    DARNIT! I should have waited for Callfilter to come out before I used mine.

    Sprint PCS user since 1999

    -=-=-
    Palm IIIC -> Palm M100 -> Treo 300 -> Treo 600 -> Treo 650 -> Treo 700P -> Treo 755P
    Do I count as a Palm addict if I still have my original Palm IIIC?
    -=-=-
    Praise is what I do...
  15. #255  
    When a bank accidently places money in your account, they do not send an e-mail stating their intent when funds magically show up in your account. If Sprint invalidates every offer of a gift in each e-mail, they must do so for all of the gift certificates. With no clear terms and conditions set forth, each individual e-mail is demonstrative of their unequivocal intent to provide a 100 dollar gift certificate for that particular e-mail with it specific gift certificate number. It is very hard for you to argue specific intent here with an automated system with severe holes in it and a lack of attention to terms and condition. It gets murky at best with intent when it is automated poorly. They gave me (hypothetical) eight offers in my mailbox, each separate and apart from the other. I do not disagree with your reasoning (first year review was helpful, thanks), it is now up to Sprint to inform mike or anyone with glitched gift certificates that it was not so intended. Without the clear terms and condition on the validation site, mike can make any reasonable inference of intent he likes. You are making an assumption about intent and automated internet service (I am just conjecturing and not invalidating either of your points , I like this intelligent back and forth, as I, too hold a J.D.).

    Once again, Drdoom, you're acting like a crybaby, assuming that I am a miscreat based on no evidence...good one...crybaby. Did I forget to call you a crybaby? How am I morrally bankrupt when I offered the other gift certificate to the guy that got screwed? I was the only person that mentioned verizon in the post, so who do you think you were referring to. Dummy.
  16. #256  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mungo4Prez
    Nope. i was told that my phone number was invalid - even though I bought the sucker 15 days ago. Sent an email to the help link provided
    Ditto, I emailed them too. I purchased from Sprint in Dec. so I really don't know what's going on. Maybe they are using this as a screening/validating process.
    "Everyday is a Gift, A Blessing, An Opportunity!" - GM

    Phone history: Treo 600, Treo 650, Treo Centro, Pixi, Centro again, 800w, Treo 755p, Palm Pre
  17. #257  
    Well used one of my codes. Bought Zlauncher, then a skin thing for 6.00 for the ZL. also a year to EX...

    Now on to my other $700 what DVDplayer and ripper is good ?
  18. #258  
    Quote Originally Posted by michael82574
    Well used one of my codes. Bought Zlauncher, then a skin thing for 6.00 for the ZL. also a year to EX...

    Now on to my other $700 what DVDplayer and ripper is good ?
    WTF? So it still works? If so, I think some programmers at handango/sprint need to be re-trained...
  19. #259  
    what?! i still have a code to use. post what url you are using to use the codes cuz I try them& they are all invalid???

    Quote Originally Posted by michael82574
    Well used one of my codes. Bought Zlauncher, then a skin thing for 6.00 for the ZL. also a year to EX...

    Now on to my other $700 what DVDplayer and ripper is good ?
  20. #260  
    Quote Originally Posted by nicegoogly
    When a bank accidently places money in your account, they do not send an e-mail stating their intent when funds magically show up in your account. If Sprint invalidates every offer of a gift in each e-mail, they must do so for all of the gift certificates. With no clear terms and conditions set forth, each individual e-mail is demonstrative of their unequivocal intent to provide a 100 dollar gift certificate for that particular e-mail with it specific gift certificate number. It is very hard for you to argue specific intent here with an automated system with severe holes in it and a lack of attention to terms and condition.
    Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I meant to say that if one elects to transfer $1,000 from savings to checking and the bank transfers $10,000 (say, due to a technical glitch an extra $9,000 "new money" got transferred), then that extra money is not yours to keep. While this example is not synonymous, in its entirety, with the gift certificate glitch, I feel that at least the ratio is.

    Specific intent is hard to argue, but reasonable intent isn't. The very reason for Mike, me or you to approach Handango/Sprint's website was predicated on the belief that you would get a $100 software gift certificate as a gift/reward for owning a Sprint Treo 600/650. While certain, specific terms were not clarified, the general picture was clear enough to make a reasonable judgment.

    Quote Originally Posted by nicegoogly
    It gets murky at best with intent when it is automated poorly. They gave me (hypothetical) eight offers in my mailbox, each separate and apart from the other. I do not disagree with your reasoning (first year review was helpful, thanks), it is now up to Sprint to inform mike or anyone with glitched gift certificates that it was not so intended. Without the clear terms and condition on the validation site, mike can make any reasonable inference of intent he likes. You are making an assumption about intent and automated internet service
    Yes, separate offers certainly do not help Sprint's cause. However, even as a result of incessantly clicking "submit" it would be tough to prove that Sprint willingly and intentionally sent $800, $1000, etc. worth of software gift certificates for your 1 Treo. Caselaw and principles of equity would probably give this notion a smackdown.

    Quote Originally Posted by nicegoogly
    (I am just conjecturing and not invalidating either of your points , I like this intelligent back and forth, as I, too hold a J.D.).
    Likewise.

Posting Permissions