My point was that a highest bid is a highest bid, regardless of the increment over the second-highest. One unfailing principle of auction is 'highest bidder wins'. Under the 'blind' circumstances of on-line bidding it makes no sense to use a convention of increments that may apply (but not invariably) to live auctions, where everyone present knows the state of bidding. This is certainly not the case in eBay's on-line auctions, because bidders are not 'present' in the sight and hearing of their competitors and the auctioneer.
eBay already acknowledges the difference in circumstances by according precedence to the first bidder of one or more to bid a given amount, right through to 'fall of hammer'. 'Same amount' bids don't happen in 'live' auctions.
de