Amazing Fraud #15 ? 0

[Taco]

Why is he cancelling bids?!?!?

 

My guess is because someone messaged the seller last night saying a whole forum is placing bids to win and find out his information to pursue him legally. And the seller either found the forum or just came over to comics general and canceled all the bids from the start of the thread. My guess is they will cancel them from now on and just try to cash out with the few thousand it is at now.

[Buzzetta]

Priority should be given to items with the most complaints, whether they be emailed or called in.

 

I should not be sitting here in my PJ bottoms still trying to figure out the benefits and testing the security parameters of a Facebook group page vs a organizational page on a sunny day and already be at the beach....

 

But... such is life.

[crazyhips]

Still listed.

[chrisco37]

As per the phone call. Offering a 1962 original copy and photos and then in his text saying it's not an original 1962 copy.

 

You can't tell from the pic he stole from Wally that it's an original because he quite obviously and intentionally edited in that voice bubble over top of the CGC label. What WOULD be solid proof is if Wally sent them the original pic without the CGC label edited out.

 

This looks like a job for.....

 

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Why is he cancelling bids?!?!?

 

My guess is because someone messaged the seller last night saying a whole forum is placing bids to win and find out his information to pursue him legally. And the seller either found the forum or just came over to comics general and canceled all the bids from the start of the thread. My guess is they will cancel them from now on and just try to cash out with the few thousand it is at now.

 

He is probably trying desperately to get the last legitimate high bidder to agree pay and end the auction early.

[crazyhips]

shame it's not possible to e-mail bidders and let them know it's a reprint

[fantastic_four]

As per the phone call. Offering a 1962 original copy and photos and then in his text saying it's not an original 1962 copy.

 

You can't tell from the pic he stole from Wally that it's an original because he quite obviously and intentionally edited in that voice bubble over top of the CGC label. What WOULD be solid proof is if Wally sent them the original pic without the CGC label edited out.

 

This looks like a job for.....

 

 

 

That's my evil side, the one who craves the awesome power of Magneto. Scammer threads is where you see my good side.

[fantastic_four]

Most people expect eBay to act as legal and ethical enforcement, but the main problem is that eBay has few ways of gathering evidence if the person doing the reporting doesn't give it to them.

 

I was mulling this over, and it occurred to me that in the court system, we have three players--judge (and possibly jury), prosecutor, and detective. Detectives gather evidence; prosecutors present it to the judge (and jury if present); and judges (or juries) make decisions. The only one of those roles that eBay can fill is judge--they have very few ways to gather evidence like detectives do or figure out the best way to present it like prosecutors do. We all expect eBay to fill ALL of those roles, and a tiny handful of people realize that when they're reporting an auction for fraud, they really have to fill the role of both detective and prosecutor gathering, organizing, and presenting evidence for eBay to make a decision. As is true in the court system, detectives, prosecutors, and the general public love to blame judges for letting criminals go on "technicalities"--and that's true as well with eBay, we love to blame them for judging incomplete or scattered evidence in the only way they really objectively can do so without deeming someone guilty who really isn't.

 

So while I think eBay doesn't do a great job at preventing fraud and frequently errs on the side of what makes them the most profit, there is little to no appreciation for the very difficult position they're in. The vast majority of the time, NOBODY can gather enough evidence to prove a scam, particularly if the scammer is sophisticated. Crime in the real world usually goes the same way. The distance and anonymity of the Internet has opened up a whole new horizon of opportunity for scams that eBay and the rest of us are largely powerless to stop. We really do rely on scammers being not that smart--and luckily, most aren't. I suppose the real world is like that too, which is why the mafia has been able to operate as effectively as it has and why so many petty criminals tend to get caught and overcrowd our prisons.

[aggr1103]

shame it's not possible to e-mail bidders and let them know it's a reprint

 

Used to be able to. Or at least recognize who was the highest bidder and then message them to know what was going on.

[fantastic_four]

shame it's not possible to e-mail bidders and let them know it's a reprint

 

Used to be able to. Or at least recognize who was the highest bidder and then message them to know what was going on.

 

Vigilantes do a lot of good. They also make a lot of mistakes. The worst thing about visible bid names is that if some whackjob is trying to execute a grudge against someone else, they can start mail-bombing all the bidders and telling them the seller is a scammer. It's easy to forget that scammers using the system to execute punishment against vigilantes is just as possible as vigilante justice itself.

 

A number of people on the boards first met me when I did exactly what you're describing--I've sent dozens of blanket emails to bidders on auction scams. I was glad I could do it, but I've since realized that it gives scammers an equally powerful tool.

[Erndog]

So while I think eBay doesn't do a great job at preventing fraud and frequently errs on the side of what makes them the most profit, there is little to no appreciation for the very difficult position they're in. The vast majority of the time, NOBODY can gather enough evidence to prove a scam, particularly if the scammer is sophisticated. Crime in the real world usually goes the same way. The distance and anonymity of the Internet has opened up a whole new horizon of opportunity for scams that eBay and the rest of us are largely powerless to stop. We really do rely on scammers being not that smart--and luckily, most aren't.

 

While I agree with most of what you're saying, this isn't some elaborate ruse the seller is pulling on everyone. There's no sophistication here. It's clear as day what is going on.

 

Ebay doesn't need to wear many hats in this case. Any judge in the world could see what's happening here- this goes beyond the realm of typical selling practices.

[DamageInc-migration]

You can convict on circumstantial evidence.

 

Do you believe eBay do a god job of policing fraud?

 

Not circumstantial evidence as loose as what you just described related to shilling.

 

I think eBay errs on the side of what makes them most profitable, and that means no, I don't think they do a good job. I've spent a few hundred hours over the last decade trying to get eBay to get rid of some specific scammers, and all I can really say is that if you give them solid proof, they usually act--but far more often than not, there is little or no definitive proof that's possible to get. And I also believe few people understand what "solid" proof is and just think if they report someone, that should be the end of it. Most people expect eBay to act as legal and ethical enforcement, but the main problem is that eBay has few ways of gathering evidence if the person doing the reporting doesn't give it to them. I wouldn't be surprised if they periodically and/or sporadically fail at acting upon solid proof given the volume of scammers they deal with, and yea, they deserve to get hammered each and every time they do that.

 

There have also been several threads started on the Ebay comic board about this auction, and all of them have been pulled. I guess I assumed they reviewed those threads before pulling them

[Montezuma]

My problem with e-bay is the amount of evidence they require to do something is extremely high. I've been ripped off on e-bay, and the evidence was great enough to have the guy convicted in a court of law, but it wasn't enough to have him removed from e-bay.

 

[fantastic_four]

So while I think eBay doesn't do a great job at preventing fraud and frequently errs on the side of what makes them the most profit, there is little to no appreciation for the very difficult position they're in. The vast majority of the time, NOBODY can gather enough evidence to prove a scam, particularly if the scammer is sophisticated. Crime in the real world usually goes the same way. The distance and anonymity of the Internet has opened up a whole new horizon of opportunity for scams that eBay and the rest of us are largely powerless to stop. We really do rely on scammers being not that smart--and luckily, most aren't.

 

While I agree with most of what you're saying, this isn't some elaborate ruse the seller is pulling on everyone. There's no sophistication here. It's clear as day what is going on.

 

Ebay doesn't need to wear many hats in this case. Any judge in the world could see what's happening here- this goes beyond the realm of typical selling practices.

 

It's clear to us because we know Wally. It's clear to me because I saw Wally post that picture three years ago after he took it. None of that is clear to eBay, nor have I heard of anyone telling eBay enough vital info from this thread to make a call. Maybe it has happened, but I haven't heard of it.

[fantastic_four]

My problem with e-bay is the amount of evidence they require to do something is extremely high. I've been ripped off on e-bay, and the evidence was great enough to have the guy convicted in a court of law, but it wasn't enough to have him removed from e-bay.

 

What was the evidence?

 

All I can really say is when people think they have plenty of evidence, when I've reviewed it, the great majority of the time, they're wrong. That doesn't mean I think you were wrong, just that typically people don't have enough evidence, yet they think they do.

[DeadpoolJr.]

You can convict on circumstantial evidence.

 

Do you believe eBay do a god job of policing fraud?

 

Not circumstantial evidence as loose as what you just described related to shilling.

 

I think eBay errs on the side of what makes them most profitable, and that means no, I don't think they do a good job. I've spent a few hundred hours over the last decade trying to get eBay to get rid of some specific scammers, and all I can really say is that if you give them solid proof, they usually act--but far more often than not, there is little or no definitive proof that's possible to get. And I also believe few people understand what "solid" proof is and just think if they report someone, that should be the end of it. Most people expect eBay to act as legal and ethical enforcement, but the main problem is that eBay has few ways of gathering evidence if the person doing the reporting doesn't give it to them. I wouldn't be surprised if they periodically and/or sporadically fail at acting upon solid proof given the volume of scammers they deal with, and yea, they deserve to get hammered each and every time they do that.

 

There have also been several threads started on the Ebay comic board about this auction, and all of them have been pulled. I guess I assumed they reviewed those threads before pulling them

Usually the only threads I find on ebay are about scammers like this or people on a rant about why graded comics are bad.

[DamageInc-migration]

So while I think eBay doesn't do a great job at preventing fraud and frequently errs on the side of what makes them the most profit, there is little to no appreciation for the very difficult position they're in. The vast majority of the time, NOBODY can gather enough evidence to prove a scam, particularly if the scammer is sophisticated. Crime in the real world usually goes the same way. The distance and anonymity of the Internet has opened up a whole new horizon of opportunity for scams that eBay and the rest of us are largely powerless to stop. We really do rely on scammers being not that smart--and luckily, most aren't.

 

While I agree with most of what you're saying, this isn't some elaborate ruse the seller is pulling on everyone. There's no sophistication here. It's clear as day what is going on.

 

Ebay doesn't need to wear many hats in this case. Any judge in the world could see what's happening here- this goes beyond the realm of typical selling practices.

 

It's clear to us because we know Wally. It's clear to me because I saw Wally post that picture three years ago after he took it. None of that is clear to eBay, nor have I heard of anyone telling eBay enough vital info from this thread to make a call. Maybe it has happened, but I haven't heard of it.

 

Do you have passion4comics on ignore?

[fantastic_four]

Do you have passion4comics on ignore?

 

I believe the ignore feature to be for people with overly-fragile egos with the exception of those who use it to ignore users who are repeatedly harassing them, so no. I have nobody on ignore. I mentally ignore the small handful of arrogant or combative fools around here by simply not reading their posts, and I have no reason to think passion4comics a fool. Which post are you referring to of his?

[DamageInc-migration]

Do you have passion4comics on ignore?

 

I believe the ignore feature to be for people with overly-fragile egos with the exception of those who use it to ignore users who are repeatedly harassing them, so no. I have nobody on ignore. I mentally ignore the small handful of arrogant or combative fools around here by simply not reading their posts, and I have no reason to think passion4comics a fool. Which post are you referring to of his?

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=307443&Number=6885211#Post6885211

[fantastic_four]

Do you have passion4comics on ignore?

 

I believe the ignore feature to be for people with overly-fragile egos with the exception of those who use it to ignore users who are repeatedly harassing them, so no. I have nobody on ignore. I mentally ignore the small handful of arrogant or combative fools around here by simply not reading their posts, and I have no reason to think passion4comics a fool. Which post are you referring to of his?

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=307443&Number=6885211#Post6885211

 

Since I responded to that post and quoted it, it should be pretty clear that I don't have him on ignore. Did you have a comment or question about my reply?