jpolz

Walls I agree with you and think you handled it appropriately. Sounds like everything is going to work out for you, but there were plenty of warning flags justifying your concern:

- Not replying to your Take It in timely fashion

- Telling you the item was on hold (not publicly posted) but then next day saying it's yours

- Telling you he'd send a tracking #, but not hearing after a week

- Seller says item not mailed (a week after payment) and it will go out "shortly" (vague)

- No word from the seller 10 days after the last communication

Taken separately those are each pretty innocent. As a group, it's reasonable to be concerned esp. since you'd never done business with him before.

You posted here with a question and asked for opinions. You didn't flame the guy or whine about how long it took. I say you did everything right I hope it works out.

:thumbsup:

I don't understand the point of this debate. Once a person goes on the list the only one who can remove them is the accuser. If the accuser doesn't feel like he's been made whole then it doesn't matter if the rest of the board disagrees -- there's no process in the proposed rules for a person being removed from the list unless the person who had them added agrees to it.

4) Removal From The PL

a) If the accuser requests the accused be removed form the PL, the accused will be removed.

 

b) If the accused makes full restitution to the satisfaction of the accuser, the accused will be removed from the PL.

 

c) If multiple accusers are involved, and full restitution is satisfactorily made to all accusers, the accused will be removed from the PL.

The whole debate over 2d seems redundant to me, because removal is subject only to the satisfaction of the accuser.

Great book! I used to love that series.

IMO this is one of his best Fathom covers. I like #13 better, but this one is really great.

2 slabs arrived quickly & very well packed. Thanks!

Got my Godzilla #1 in great condition - thanks!

I bought several books from Matteo and was very pleased with his communication, quick shipping, and the good quality books. Thanks!

Got my Wonderland Annual 2010 Mid-Ohio Con variant. Looks great - thanks!

I don't even remember what name I used at the local supermarket for their discount card application, but I'm sure the address I put down was "1 main street". As long as I can swipe the card and get the discount I don't care what happens to the junk they try to mail out.

I agree with you about the SS#. Too many people give it out too freely, consequently way too many people have access to it that shouldn't. I disagree with you about the Driver's License Number though. Your state isn't allowed to disclose or share your DLN except as specifically allowed under federal law. It can be used as a secondary means of identification and used by identity thieves.

Your cable company, or any other business you deal with, should be asking for your account # with them, or your phone #, in order to identify you in their system. Anything else puts your financial (and possibly personal) safety at risk.

Kudos to Pinky Lee Zepplin for 2 issues of Batman: Battle for the Cowl

Well at least I know who has been outbidding me on ebay.

sorry 'bout that

kind of

Some new SS comic I've picked up in the last few months. Am I the only one (besides Billy the Kid (thumbs u that is still collecting/buying Turner signed SS comics?

I am - here's a few I've picked up recently. Nothing as flashy as that JLA #1 colored by Steigerwald tho' ... that's amazing!

Just a couple from me:

seanfingh, thanks I see where you're coming from. Stuff to think about. Appreciated.

First of all, if these people are are so tenuously and tangentially involved in this Board that they can go two years without knowing they are on the Probation List, what difference does it make?

That's kind of my point Sean. Jmarch51 has been an active member of this board. He's bought & sold many items and has multiple positive comments in the Kudos thread. He simply didn't know about the probation list ("where is this probation list? Does it say why I am on there"). He didn't know he'd been blackballed (at least, by the people who follow the probie list) over something that happened 2 years ago, and frankly that strikes me as unfair.

That's what difference it makes, to me.

Jploz,

Do you have any skin in those transactions? If not, what's the beef?!?

I can't remember if I've bought from jmarch51 or not, but I've seen enough of his threads to have thought about buying from him, but my "point" (not beef) was simply that I'm suggesting an addition to the Probation List process -- to notify the people who are added to the list.

I'm surprised there's so much criticism of that idea. Maybe it is a "secret cadre" as comix4fun suggested (I don't really think that).

I am pretty sure most people have attempted to work out any issues before just coming here and adding someone.

Most probably have. I'm just suggesting that, at a minimum, when someone is added to the probation list the person doing it send them a PM so we know that someone has actually contacted them after the deal went bad and about the probation issue and they know about the probation list.

 

Instead what seems to be happening is a sale goes bad, people wait 30 days and then say "my sale went bad so I want to put so-and-so on the probation list" and boom! it happens.

 

What are some examples of this happening?

mikegg is one. The sale went bad and he's on the probation list until he apologizes to the seller. After the sale went bad the seller made no effort to contact him to work things out to mutual satisfaction -- he refunded the money but was still upset so wants the guy on the probation list.

Look at Jmarch51 -- OK it's from 2 yrs ago but the posts are still there. Buyer reports the deal falls through and he took the book to ebay. Ok that's wrong. Didn't say anything about trying to contact him and say "hey we had a deal, we need to work this out". Just "the deal fell through let's probie him" and bang! the next day jmarch51 is on the probation list.

It's being used as a punishment by people who are angry their deals fell through. In neither case is anyone out any money or merchandise, and while I agree that backing out of a deal is wrong and should be discouraged, people are being added to the probation list for busted deals without actually trying to work things out.

So in other words, no.

The 30 day waiting period is supposed to give people an opportunity to work out their problems. Instead what seems to be happening is a sale goes bad, people wait 30 days and then say "my sale went bad so I want to put so-and-so on the probation list" and boom! it happens.

That's not a warning to the rest of the board about buyers/sellers who ought to be avoided, that's a punishment from someone who's unhappy about a transaction that went bad (which, lets be honest, happens sometimes).

A search posts shows that Jmarch51 has had multiple successful transactions and received multiple kudos in the kudos thread after he was put on the probation list. Does he really deserve to be on the probie list, or was this a one-time mistake that could have been worked out if the two parties just talked before the offended buyer complained and said "I want him on the list".

To my surprise mikegg did make a 3rd post, but he's apparently unaware he's on the probation list so I sent him a PM.

Related to that, another user, Jmarch51, was put on the probation list 2 years ago and didn't know about it. I'm pretty sure a lot of people are unaware this probation list even exists.

Is there any communication at all when people go on the probation list? If not, would it be unreasonable to suggest that when a person is added to the probation list that they get sent a PM letting them know, and know who they need to contact to resolve the situation?

I refunded. Not worth the hassle.

Question: If mikegg does get (re-)added to the probation list over this, how could he ever get himself off it at this point?

 

These are all valid points, but you act as though the PayPal "chargeback" (which it isn't, btw, it's a dispute) is instantaneous (it isn't.) The dispute is not settled. When the dispute settles, or after 30 days, the seller can request that the "buyer" be put on the list. I really don't see the fanfare, except that the seller may be ticked off big time.

 

 

The outcome of the dispute bears little on the intent of the party attempting to undo the transaction. Whether or not he is successful his intent was to break his agreement with the seller.

That's not necessarily true. I've initiated a paypal dispute myself -- to preserve my rights before they expired -- when what I really, really wanted was for the seller to just ship me the books I'd paid him for.

In this case the buyer may intend to break the sale, he may even have already gotten the books elsewhere. Or, maybe, a couple of status emails from branget could also convince him that everything's cool & not to worry so much, the internet's not a scary place & his book is on the way and will be here very soon.

Just a thought.

I agree to an extent. However, Pay Pal's terms of service don't say anything about accepting personal payments as a violation. Their only violation is a seller "demanding" or "asking for" personal payments. Unless a buyer complains about being forced to pay personal they don't have a recourse against it.

They do, it's payment review (4.3 of the user agreement). If you have what they consider an "excessive percentage" of your payments received as personal payments, you may get an email from paypal saying they've disabled your ability to receive personal payments. It happened to several guys on another forum I'm on.

CGC should follow Pay Pal's requirements to the letter. They should not allow sellers to DEMAND personal payments but if buyers want to offer to pay in that manner there's not much they can do about it.

Paypal warns buyers the following about using the personal payment method:

1 - You cannot file a dispute if you use the personal payment method.

2 - If you use your credit card as the Payment Method for a Personal Payment, you may be charged a cash-advance fee by your credit card company.

Given that, why would a buyer voluntarily give up any dispute protections, no matter how lame they may be, or risk purchases being charged as cash-advances? No, when a buyer pays via for merchandise the personal payment method it's realistic to assume the seller asked them to.

I suppose that is why we have these threads, so that the other person can speak their piece, or peace, or...well, you get the picture;)

 

It's not perfect, but the probation list serves as a warning.

 

My question is, let's say the person really was nervous about the fact that the books were not "in hand". Would he be let off the hook if he admitted that? I know he said he wanted to move forward, but are second thoughts a terrible thing in this case?

That'd be up to the seller who put him on the list.

My problem with this, really, is the big opportunity I see for abuse. I think group policing works great when there's a lot of transparency. The thing is, message boards like this tend to be somewhat insular & protective of their own. People are going to believe a person they know over someone they don't; they're going to believe someone with a high post count over a low post count. That's natural and not necessarily bad -- but if you don't have at least a little transparency then it invites abuse too.

Look what we've got here: A sale that the only evidence of is from 1 person.

The other party added to the board's "not safe to do business with" list.

The only person who can remove him from that list? The person who put him there.

That's a fine system if we're all completely honest -- but eventually we're gonna get bit in the by someone who's had a run of bad luck or just isn't quite as honest as we thought they were.

Anyway, I've certainly had my say on this so I'll stop. The rest of the board is okay with this so there it is. I just thought I'd explain my position.

Based on your criteria, there is never an instance in which a seller can place a buyer on the probation list because no one here can "prove" that they weren't paid.

That's not what I said. I said "My concern is that the transaction occurred entirely via Private Message."

Not that one part was private, or even that an important detail was. The only evidence we have that there even WAS a transaction for which to Probie this guy is that we think branget is a stand-up guy and that the dude with 2 posts to his name will somehow find out he's on the probation list and make his case.

The buyer is more than welcome to come to this forum and state his case and present his side of it. If he refuses to do so, or doesn't want to he doesn't get a presumption of innocence he gets a judgment against him by default.

He's already been judged. He's on the probation list.