Goblin's view on property WAS : Re: The Fundamental Message.../ Heroes...

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 176517

> Hickengruendler:
> 
> I completely agree with this. After reading this thread, I tried 
> seeing it from the Goblins' point of view, but I simply can't. I 
> admit that part of the reason might be, that the Wizard's idea of 
> property in this case basically is the same as ours, and I'm 
sinply 
> raised that way, but the Goblins' claim make no sense to me, 
> particularly Griphook's. For me, it is as if some German had sold 
a 
> car to an American some eighty years ago, and now I want to have 
the 
> Oldtimer, because I'm a German as well. That's just odd.
> 
> Also, to me it just reads as if the Goblins want both, the gold 
and 
> the valuable object, it was paid for, and that doesn't exactly 
endear 
> me to them. I do see, that Griphook was simply raised with 
different 
> values, but I simply cannot sympathise with him here.
>



Alla:

I had been also reading this thread and thinking about it and I was 
just about to write that whether it makes sense to us or not, is not 
the point to me that Goblin POV on property should be respected IMO 
as well.

Nevertheless, I was hesitant to write it, because something bugged 
me too, and I was not particularly sympathetic to Griphokk either 
and I could not put my finger upon it.

I think you nailed it though - Goblins wanting **both** money and 
property just seems so very **unfair** to me.

Um, dears, if that is how you view your products, first do what 
Steve suggested, namely drew a written contract :), but also, um 
kindly return the money to the family of the wizard, from whom you 
want to take the object back.



Um, yeah, my opinion of course.

Alla