Abstract
Spirited disagreement exists among online auction participants over the ethics of sniping: delaying one's bid until the closing seconds of an online auction. Through analysis of the structural features of online auctions and by deploying Rawls's (1955) distinction between justifying an action under a practice and justifying the practice itself, I argue that: (i) the disagreement is better conceived as one over the ethics of online auction hosting (and therefore, over business ethics) than over the ethics of online auction participation; (ii) so conceived, the argument against sniping is nonetheless implausible; and (iii) the disagreement remains interesting not on the merits, but for the curious fact that it is bidders who complain about sniping.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 163-173 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Journal of Business Ethics |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Aug 2003 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Business, Management and Accounting(all)
- Business and International Management
- Economics and Econometrics
Cite this
Snipers, Stalkers, and Nibblers : Online Auction Business Ethics. / Marcoux, Alexei.
In: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 46, No. 2, 08.2003, p. 163-173.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Snipers, Stalkers, and Nibblers
T2 - Online Auction Business Ethics
AU - Marcoux, Alexei
PY - 2003/8
Y1 - 2003/8
N2 - Spirited disagreement exists among online auction participants over the ethics of sniping: delaying one's bid until the closing seconds of an online auction. Through analysis of the structural features of online auctions and by deploying Rawls's (1955) distinction between justifying an action under a practice and justifying the practice itself, I argue that: (i) the disagreement is better conceived as one over the ethics of online auction hosting (and therefore, over business ethics) than over the ethics of online auction participation; (ii) so conceived, the argument against sniping is nonetheless implausible; and (iii) the disagreement remains interesting not on the merits, but for the curious fact that it is bidders who complain about sniping.
AB - Spirited disagreement exists among online auction participants over the ethics of sniping: delaying one's bid until the closing seconds of an online auction. Through analysis of the structural features of online auctions and by deploying Rawls's (1955) distinction between justifying an action under a practice and justifying the practice itself, I argue that: (i) the disagreement is better conceived as one over the ethics of online auction hosting (and therefore, over business ethics) than over the ethics of online auction participation; (ii) so conceived, the argument against sniping is nonetheless implausible; and (iii) the disagreement remains interesting not on the merits, but for the curious fact that it is bidders who complain about sniping.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0346040163&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0346040163&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1023/A:1025001823321
DO - 10.1023/A:1025001823321
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0346040163
VL - 46
SP - 163
EP - 173
JO - Journal of Business Ethics
JF - Journal of Business Ethics
SN - 0167-4544
IS - 2
ER -