posted on September 26, 2000 11:58:08 AM
I recently received an email (and permision to post it here) from the buyer who was accused of an "outright lie" in the following thread:
Valerie, I did not lie I made a simple mistake and confused your auction
with another ebay auctioneer whose name happens to be Valera,
Item#418765XXX(Incidentally, this auctioneer does accept checks). As you
can see your names are very close and it would be easy to confuse the two
auctions. This is what I meant when I said "sorry wrong auction". Please
send me my check back, and I will add 33 cents for the stamp, and 25 cents
for the envelope on to the total cost for the money order. I will send the
money order with the additional 58 cents after I receive my check from you.
I am disappointed with the way you trashed a new ebay user with your
flaming posts. It was nice to see that the overwhelming majority of people
that responded agreed and defended me to you by saying that this indeed was
a simple mistake.
Respectfully, Bill
edited auction number
[ edited by amalgamated2000 on Sep 26, 2000 12:01 PM ]
posted on September 26, 2000 12:03:01 PM
And the point is? I thought this was a done and over with... the seller was pointed out the error of her ways, why dredge it up again?
Ain't Life Grand...
posted on September 26, 2000 01:52:36 PM
Thanks for the update, amalgamated2000. I'd wondered if this buyer ever read the thread.
I'd say both of them are at fault to some extent, though that really doesn't matter now. If the buyer had written the seller as informative a note as he wrote to you, instead of simply "sorry wrong auction," it would have been more clear to Valerie, too.
posted on September 26, 2000 02:13:48 PMRainyBear: That was apparently the (followup) email the buyer sent to Valerie; it wasn't written TO amalgamated2000.
posted on September 26, 2000 02:33:54 PM
Thanks for the update. I feel sorry for the buyer, apparently a newbie at this.
That whole thread made me rethink AW.
The person that started the thread deleted all of their posts on it, then requested it be locked.
I think AW should rethink it's policies. Instead of an "edit" feature, maybe only an "add-on" feature. Then people might think more before they write, if the words are left there forever.
~Not barrelracer on ebay, don't pick on them!~
posted on September 26, 2000 02:40:52 PM
I remember that thread.
The seller wrote an email to a buyer who was late in sending payment, and wrote a check when the auction said no checks. The email in my opinion was justified and was not rude.
Even if her email *was* in some way rude - does that really justify bashing her? I have checked out the seller - she seems to be a decent seller on ebay. Over 3000+ positive feedbacks, and no negatives in at least the past 6 months. She is obviously doing something right! She obviously felt her email to the buyer was justified.
So she wrote an email to her customer that you all don't agree with. Big deal.
amalgamated: Your starting this thread (and as twelvepole said - "why dredge it up again?" shows what kind of person you are. A troublemaker. It's over and done with, I'm sure the buyer & seller have gone their separate ways by now. Leave it alone already!
posted on September 26, 2000 02:56:20 PM
I would also like to say something in Valerie's defense. I have not posted very much on this board but I have learned a lot on these boards. I have learned who's comments I can trust and who's I can't. I have read several posts that Valerie made and she has always come across (to me anyways) as helpful and friendly. I never checked out her feedback (didn't know I could do that) but I just read that she has thousands of positive feedbacks and no negatives in at least the past 6 months. I really can't believe everyone who is jumping all over her for just writing an email to a customer that all of you didn't approve of. She seems to be just like any one of us - except she made the mistake of telling all of us what she wrote to a customer. And because you all did not agree with how she handled HER transaction with HER customer, you decided to jump all over her and "bash" her. I really feel sorry for all of you who are into bashing one another simply because you do not agree with another person's post.
posted on September 26, 2000 03:00:27 PM
The seller came here and accused this person of "an outright lie" and provided enough information for everyone to identify him. Then, when she found out that the seller had been given the chance to defend himself, she deleted her posts and locked the thread.
The buyer told me he would have posted here had the thread not been locked, but that he has been too busy to come back here to register and participate.
I thought many people would be interested in hearing his side of the story, particularly since it shows that sometimes there really are very legitimate reasons behind situations like this. I thought that it might make people think twice about assuming the worst -- to maybe give buyers the benefit of the doubt once in a while.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All rights reserved. All wrongs reversed.
posted on September 26, 2000 03:13:25 PM
amalgamated:
Did you *actually* expect the buyer to say they were wrong? I'm not saying who is right or wrong - I can't do that since I was NOT THERE. And neither were you.
After reading the thread, of *course* the buyer is going to see how (almost) everyone supported him and he's going to say "it was an honest mistake". Prior to reading this board, he only said 3 words to the seller. NOT very good communication on his part! Then, he reads the board and sends her an email (and also to you obviously) about how it was an "honest mistake".
Let it go, man. Do you *really* have nothing better to do with your time but bring up old news trying to cause a ruckus between people?
posted on September 26, 2000 03:20:25 PMonsale: It seems to me that your comment to amalgamated2000 (“Your starting this thread (and as twelvepole said - "why dredge it up again?" shows what kind of person you are. A troublemaker.”) is WAY out of line.
Here we had a poster (valerie47) come and present her side of the story and seek validation. She was questioned, posters did not agree with her, she became defensive, others sided with her and then she went and deleted all her posts when the buyer was identified and invited to the thread for discussion. She then requested that the thread be locked and it was.
So what we were left with was a highly edited version of a discussion that valerie47 precipitated: CUSTOMER outright LIED!
Now, it appears to me that amalgamated2000 has made an effort to present “the rest of the story”, and it is incredible to me that people are bashing amalgamated2000 for presenting a balanced follow-up to a one-sided bashing and accusation of a new bidder!
I don’t care what the sellers past performance, post count, prior post content, or feedback number is: they should not expect to be able to come here and present an argument without expecting to be challenged on their assumptions. If, after that occurs, they become defensive and delete all their postings without giving the person accused of having “outright LIED!” a chance to respond, I fail to see how that makes the person attempting to do so a “troublemaker”.
In fact, your statement to amalgamated2000 may be in violation of the CG.
I agree with barrelracer: ”I think AW should rethink it's policies. Instead of an "edit" feature, maybe only an "add-on" feature. Then people might think more before they write, if the words are left there forever.”
posted on September 26, 2000 03:49:35 PM
I would like to add an extra thought for everyone here. The sellers who start threads and bash buyers with names like, stupid, liar, thief, deadbeat, etc etc etc. You seem to forget that buyers hang out here too. How do you know it is not one of your buyers reading the rotten thoughts you type in these threads? Have any of you heard the line "if you can't say something nice...?". Everyone has a right to their opinion, they DO NOT have the right to push it down everyone elses throat!
posted on September 27, 2000 08:21:20 AM
This is a problem with message boards. To get a response you need a provocative title.... but you might be blowing the whole thing out of perspective.
A related topic (one of my pet peeves): why do we resort to name calling - liar, troublemaker, etc. Can't we just name the action and not the person?
posted on September 27, 2000 09:11:16 AM
ozwaxc
Name calling requires less thought and diverts attention away from the issue(s). It's most popular among those who do not or cannot deal with something because it would likely show the deficiency of their argument.
posted on September 27, 2000 11:05:26 AMAnd the point is? I thought this was a done and over with... the seller was pointed out the error of her ways, why dredge it up again.
It would have been done and over with except for the fact the originator of the thread deleted all of her posts and had the thread locked when it became known that the accused had been invited to the thread. The other party certainly deserved the right to defend himself. He wasn't allowed that opportunity. Why dredge it up again? Because it was never properly buried in the first place.
