EBAY: BLOCKED USER LIST 54 54

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

what's your eBay ID?

 

 

This place...with all its talk of morality, honor, doing the right thing, endless discussions of angels dancing on the heads of pins...

 

...simply window dressing to money and Kool books.

 

 

Sad really. I expected more from some of the people in this thread.

[RJamesWennblom]

It is amazing to me that this item under discussion can be relisted with the same description!

 

 

[Gabagool]

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

what's your eBay ID?

 

 

This place...with all its talk of morality, honor, doing the right thing, endless discussions of angels dancing on the heads of pins...

 

...simply window dressing to money and Kool books.

 

 

Sad really. I expected more from some of the people in this thread.

 

That's one of the main reasons, i decided not to be a regular on here any longer.... that and of course because someone got upset, so they decided to start making harassing calls to my parents house at odd hours at night. also you have a real lynch mob on this thread. you make one cry or question them, all of a sudden everyone wants to pounce on you.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Donmeca2020

[Escaflown4]

It is amazing to me that this item under discussion can be relisted with the same description!

 

 

I find it even more amazing that the books are already re-listed when the seller doesn't even have them back yet...

 

 

[HOTFLIPS]

This might get lost in this thread, but if anyone sees this, I have another Deadbeat to block and don't care if this person is a member of these boards or not

 

iefitzgibbon

 

Made me an offer & accepted it, send him 2 invoices on ebay (Never paid) Filed a claim for a Non Bidder, still no response after 4 days

[RockMyAmadeus]

I'm curious how many people see a low ball offer as a sign of disrespect. Seems silly to me to attach such emotion over it. And for those that do do you also find someone listing a book way above fmv as a sign of disrespect towards buyers?

 

When did recognizing disrespect become an emotional response?

 

The answer to your question is no. The corollary you're looking for is not pricing the item in the first place.

 

I think the whole idea of disrespect is an emotional response.

 

"Disrespect" isn't an emotion. Emotions are things like "anger", "fear", "joy", things one feels as part of a mental response to circumstances.

 

"Disrespect" is an action.

 

So to be clear on your answer then, a seller looking for a sucker by pricing something high is fine, but a buyer doing the same is disrespectful?

 

That is not the answer I gave, no.

 

The corollary you are looking for is a seller not pricing their items. That is the corollary to the buyer who makes lowball offers.

 

I disagree on both points.

 

On pricing you brought up a buyer looking for a "sucker" to take advantage of with a low ball offer. I see no difference with a seller pricing way high looking for a "sucker".

 

I understand that you see no difference, but as I said, there is one, and it's foundational. It hinges on the idea of what one may do with one's property when offering it for sale. The distinction may seem subtle...or even non-existent, as you have stated...but it is not, and goes beyond comparisons of who is looking for a "sucker." That's only looking at the situation on the surface.

[wombat]

I'm curious how many people see a low ball offer as a sign of disrespect. Seems silly to me to attach such emotion over it. And for those that do do you also find someone listing a book way above fmv as a sign of disrespect towards buyers?

 

When did recognizing disrespect become an emotional response?

 

The answer to your question is no. The corollary you're looking for is not pricing the item in the first place.

 

I think the whole idea of disrespect is an emotional response.

 

"Disrespect" isn't an emotion. Emotions are things like "anger", "fear", "joy", things one feels as part of a mental response to circumstances.

 

"Disrespect" is an action.

 

So to be clear on your answer then, a seller looking for a sucker by pricing something high is fine, but a buyer doing the same is disrespectful?

 

That is not the answer I gave, no.

 

The corollary you are looking for is a seller not pricing their items. That is the corollary to the buyer who makes lowball offers.

 

I disagree on both points.

 

On pricing you brought up a buyer looking for a "sucker" to take advantage of with a low ball offer. I see no difference with a seller pricing way high looking for a "sucker".

 

I understand that you see no difference, but as I said, there is one, and it's foundational. It hinges on the idea of what one may do with one's property when offering it for sale. The distinction may seem subtle...or even non-existent, as you have stated...but it is not, and goes beyond comparisons of who is looking for a "sucker." That's only looking at the situation on the surface.

 

You say there is a difference. I say there isn't. Probably not more to discuss.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I'm curious how many people see a low ball offer as a sign of disrespect. Seems silly to me to attach such emotion over it. And for those that do do you also find someone listing a book way above fmv as a sign of disrespect towards buyers?

 

When did recognizing disrespect become an emotional response?

 

The answer to your question is no. The corollary you're looking for is not pricing the item in the first place.

 

I think the whole idea of disrespect is an emotional response.

 

"Disrespect" isn't an emotion. Emotions are things like "anger", "fear", "joy", things one feels as part of a mental response to circumstances.

 

"Disrespect" is an action.

 

So to be clear on your answer then, a seller looking for a sucker by pricing something high is fine, but a buyer doing the same is disrespectful?

 

That is not the answer I gave, no.

 

The corollary you are looking for is a seller not pricing their items. That is the corollary to the buyer who makes lowball offers.

 

I disagree on both points.

 

On pricing you brought up a buyer looking for a "sucker" to take advantage of with a low ball offer. I see no difference with a seller pricing way high looking for a "sucker".

 

I understand that you see no difference, but as I said, there is one, and it's foundational. It hinges on the idea of what one may do with one's property when offering it for sale. The distinction may seem subtle...or even non-existent, as you have stated...but it is not, and goes beyond comparisons of who is looking for a "sucker." That's only looking at the situation on the surface.

 

You say there is a difference. I say there isn't. Probably not more to discuss.

 

There is, but I don't know that taking the time to explain it will accomplish anything. I'll just say that you're looking at the appearance, when there's more beneath the surface that isn't so obvious at first glance. Not trying to be coy; just acknowledging that trying to delve deeply into any particular subject here isn't necessarily a net gain.

[wombat]

You can keep saying there is a difference and I can keep saying there isn't. Saying I am not looking at it the right way and you are doesn't get us anywhere.

[Hado]

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

Shhhhhh.

 

Dude! Don't you know who's thread this is

 

[HarveySwick]

(thumbs u

[HarveySwick]

I've said this several times - I personally don't even use the thread. I was updating it for the community.

 

And I've stopped updating it for close to two months as the first two posts locked so it's really anyone's thread.

[Hado]

Two minutes, forty two seconds.

 

Not bad.

 

[ChrisInBaltimore]

Ebay username: escaflown4

 

This guy didn't read the description carefully and decided he didn't want the item after receiving it and asked for a return/refund. OK, annoying but fine and I agreed to it and asked him to return the item, promising to refund him when received. All good so far, but he then files a paypal dispute which of course throws my account into a negative balance, so now I can't do any business using Paypal. I have some other transactions I needed to complete which I now can't.

 

Note to buyers...if you're in a situation like this and the buyer is nice and cooperative, don't file a dispute. It will f up their finances temporarily and will just make them angry and less cooperative

 

Oat Willy, I guess you never thought I happen to be a board member. So for everyone else that wants a clarification, here are the facts from my side.

 

I am assuming he is referring to the following auction since that's the only item I have initiated a return request on.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EVIL-ERNIE-1991-92-Eternity-Mini-Series-1-5-1st-LADY-DEATH-/121681830184?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=n2GhZLDVL556jUvAIKQ9ErCZbNc%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

 

Normally I don't bother with returning items unless I feel the books are grossly over graded compared to what was advertised which happens to be the case here. He advertised issue #1 as VF+ but it was more of a Fine / Fine+ condition. I just like how he twisted the situation claiming I didn't read the description and am returning it just because I felt like it. Sorry my friend, I got better things to do with my spare time.

 

Now let's get to the second part. I sent him a message telling him that I would like to return the books since I feel they are over graded. After I didn't hear back from him, I initiated a return request through eBay hoping to get a response back. He did respond back later that day to my original eBay message stating that he is out of town and can take care of it on 7/13. I responded back that I am ok with this. Now I never initiated any type of PayPal dispute which he is claiming. The only thing I did was start a return request through eBay and that was it. I do not know why his PayPal account went into negative balance nor was this any of my intentions. Again, I just like how this was twisted in his version of the story in which he stated he replied first and I opened a PayPal dispute afterward which is far from the truth.

 

I would definitely like to hear more on what Oat Willy has to say now that the facts have been brought out from the other side of the table. If this was all a misunderstanding, then I would like to get this resolved amicably.

 

 

 

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

 

I whole heartedly agree with this post. I've never given this thread much mind and think it just breeds negativity on the boards. I believe Sharon also made a really solid post about how it was just a negative thread.

 

Use the eBay feedback system.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Official Chris S.

[wombat]

Ebay username: escaflown4

 

This guy didn't read the description carefully and decided he didn't want the item after receiving it and asked for a return/refund. OK, annoying but fine and I agreed to it and asked him to return the item, promising to refund him when received. All good so far, but he then files a paypal dispute which of course throws my account into a negative balance, so now I can't do any business using Paypal. I have some other transactions I needed to complete which I now can't.

 

Note to buyers...if you're in a situation like this and the buyer is nice and cooperative, don't file a dispute. It will f up their finances temporarily and will just make them angry and less cooperative

 

Oat Willy, I guess you never thought I happen to be a board member. So for everyone else that wants a clarification, here are the facts from my side.

 

I am assuming he is referring to the following auction since that's the only item I have initiated a return request on.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/EVIL-ERNIE-1991-92-Eternity-Mini-Series-1-5-1st-LADY-DEATH-/121681830184?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=n2GhZLDVL556jUvAIKQ9ErCZbNc%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

 

Normally I don't bother with returning items unless I feel the books are grossly over graded compared to what was advertised which happens to be the case here. He advertised issue #1 as VF+ but it was more of a Fine / Fine+ condition. I just like how he twisted the situation claiming I didn't read the description and am returning it just because I felt like it. Sorry my friend, I got better things to do with my spare time.

 

Now let's get to the second part. I sent him a message telling him that I would like to return the books since I feel they are over graded. After I didn't hear back from him, I initiated a return request through eBay hoping to get a response back. He did respond back later that day to my original eBay message stating that he is out of town and can take care of it on 7/13. I responded back that I am ok with this. Now I never initiated any type of PayPal dispute which he is claiming. The only thing I did was start a return request through eBay and that was it. I do not know why his PayPal account went into negative balance nor was this any of my intentions. Again, I just like how this was twisted in his version of the story in which he stated he replied first and I opened a PayPal dispute afterward which is far from the truth.

 

I would definitely like to hear more on what Oat Willy has to say now that the facts have been brought out from the other side of the table. If this was all a misunderstanding, then I would like to get this resolved amicably.

 

 

 

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

 

I whole heartedly agree with this post. I've never given this thread much mind and think it just breads negativity on the boards. I believe Sharon also made a really solid post about how it was just a negative thread.

 

Use the eBay feedback system.

 

It seems people would rather gnaw off their own leg than leave anything other than positive feedback.

[bb8]

This has been my problem with this thread and its predecessor from the beginning. There are always two sides to every story. I'm against encouraging others to dump giant unvetted wads of eBay users into their blocked buyers list. Add in the power of Google and the popularity of this site, and this thread has the ability to really hurt someone who is innocently tarnished.

 

Want a great example of this? The predecessor to this thread was started by a guy who soon found his own eBay account on the list. And as with most of the accused, it was simply added to the list without any discussion or vetting.

Shhhhhh.

 

Dude! Don't you know who's thread this is

 

So he mixed this thread up with the on Sym started that got nuked so what? His underlying point (that these are generally one-sided stories with no checks or balances) remains valid imo.

[CAHokie]

Two minutes, forty two seconds.

 

Not bad.

 

Your slipping Swick!

[RockMyAmadeus]

You can keep saying there is a difference and I can keep saying there isn't.

 

Yes, we both can keep doing that, true.

 

Saying I am not looking at it the right way and you are doesn't get us anywhere.

 

True, but that's not what I said. You're not looking at it "the wrong way"...you are correct: if you look at it on the surface, both sides would appear to be guilty of "looking for a sucker" and, in that respect, of being "disrespectful."

 

I do not disagree with your basic contention, on the surface.

 

But it's not that simple, and there are several broader issues involved. The privilege of property ownership, for one. Degree of "disrespect" for another. Motive, for another. It's not as simple as you're suggesting.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

also you have a real lynch mob on this thread. you make one cry or question them, all of a sudden everyone wants to pounce on you.

 

What has been said, if you take it to heart, will be for your benefit. Who is anyone to try to help other people around here? Good question. Nevertheless, you're not being lynched...just criticized. Criticism, if legitimate, though it stings, can produce great benefit if thoughtfully considered and applied.

 

Don't take it personally. It's not meant to be personal (for the most part.)

 

[revat]

You can keep saying there is a difference and I can keep saying there isn't.

 

Yes, we both can keep doing that, true.

 

Saying I am not looking at it the right way and you are doesn't get us anywhere.

 

True, but that's not what I said. You're not looking at it "the wrong way"...you are correct: if you look at it on the surface, both sides would appear to be guilty of "looking for a sucker" and, in that respect, of being "disrespectful."

 

I do not disagree with your basic contention, on the surface.

 

But it's not that simple, and there are several broader issues involved. The privilege of property ownership, for one. Degree of "disrespect" for another. Motive, for another. It's not as simple as you're suggesting.

 

 

here's the motivation for the lowball offer (buyer): I want to buy as cheaply as possible, hopefully get lucky. If not, it doesn't really cost me anything, so why not.

 

 

here's the possible motivations for a high high asking price (seller), in no particular order:

1. Want to get lucky and catch a sucker.

2. Unsure of value, want to get offers and get an idea of value (possibly for insurance).

3. I want to display this to those ebay peons and I get off on people making offers for something that those losers can never own.

4. I'm selling this for how much I paid for it.

5. I'm crazy and genuinely think this is how much its worth.

6. I know the price is higher than market, but I'm really attached to this item and its kinda rare, but if someone made me an offer at this price I wouldn't be able to turn it down. So why not leave it up at that price, doesn't cost me anything.

 

 

Are most probably in the camp of Motivation 1? Probably. But I don't think its unfathomable to be in any of the other camps. I know I've done a few myself at #4 and #6, and know people who have done #2. There's probably some reasonable things I've left out too. Suffice it to say that while most have financial motivations for posting ANYTHING on ebay at ANY price, that not all motivations (financial or otherwise) fall in the category of 'trying to catch a sucker'.

 

By the way, I don't see anything wrong with selling an item you own for any price, as long as you don't misrepresent it. It may just be a strategy, and some strategies are obviously better than others. Judging peoples attempts to profit on luxury/recreational/hobby items seems like a huge waste of time and energy. If the strategy is wrong, the market will correct it. And if that seller ends up losing money, they will correct it. Or not. Doesn't affect me either way. Who has the time to judge the business/marketing strategy of everyone they come in contact with?