posted on October 27, 2002 09:59:44 PM new
jimmylace,
Are you den-den? Or are you just surfing ebay and reporting?
Looks like the majority of the complaints are from this guy den-den. It kind of sounds like a double wammy. Sears uses automated check out which they should be negged for anyway, but this guy also seems to be on an act of vengence as well. It also caused sears to lose their powerseller status. Although, looking at many of the other feedbacks, they have gotten positives that in the text, are actually negs. This is one seller to steer clear of.
posted on October 27, 2002 10:08:30 PM new
The Rosie O'Donnel charity got hundreds of negs too. Lot of sicko's out there.
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
posted on October 28, 2002 12:10:58 AM newThe Rosie O'Donnel charity got hundreds of negs too.
Not so many negs, but a lot of neutrals in her 4allkids feedback. I read somewhere a long time ago that Rosie had to have her 4allkids feedback made private because people were bidding just to make a statement against Rosie. I'm no member of the Rosie fan club by any means, but the idea of bidding on a charity auction to flame someone is pretty C.S.
posted on October 28, 2002 12:36:45 AM new
Query: Why should someone be negged for using automated checkout? There is some manual checkout that people should use instead? Have you considered the logistics/costs involved in a high volume seller using a non-automated form of checkout?
posted on October 31, 2002 08:05:02 PM new
My only thought about the Rosie Neutrals (565??) is that People would NEG, Not Neutral if they were after her (Only Twenty-Something Negs), so they were probably Deserved.
