more food for thought...and a new twist...wow
It doesn't seem so unreasonable that he'd put up a pic of his new comic ten days after "buying" it. If the deal was agreed upon on the 18th, maybe loot was sent on the 19th, comic shipped on the 20th or 21st, it's easy to see the second buyer not getting it until the 27th or 28th, then scanning it and getting it in his sig.
I'm definitely leaning towards condemning the seller, but not at all convinced that the second buyer did anything wrong. I hope not.
why would the seller sell it for less money than he had previously agreed a sale on?
Especially as the original buyer still wanted the book.
Doesn't add up.
I find that in situations like this, it rarely adds up, or there wouldn't be a situation like this
Unless he was selling the book to two people and was waiting to see who paid up first.