An ebay category / ethical question

[kingbuzzie]

Old-N-Feeble, it seems to me that kingbuzzie clearly stated that he didn't want the seller to have it both ways, basically that he is worried about being circumvented by the seller. It's clear to me he is not saying anything wrong. He's worried that something is sold as "working", it is not "working", and the seller is right in any case.

oh no, didnt you read? I'm nitpicking trying to find a way to weasel those poor powersellers

Seriously though I really regret this discussion now. Your assessment is correct. Even though some posters spoiled the thread, there were some good views.

 

[fstop]

ok Don bye bye

 

[John Koehrer]

Annnd at 124 this is getting sillier and sillier.It seems to be just an argument with
the point having been made long ago.

 

[fstop]

There was a point other than harassing sellers? sorry bud, his bs was more than insulting, it is encouraging fraud, I don't take it on ebay not taking it here. I am an honest seller and I'm sure the other guys in this thread are too.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

We know you aren't encouraging fraud. You're asking for confirmation that it's okay for you to take inappropriate advantage. The consensus here is, "no it's not", but you're twisting others' words, trying to claim what you originally posted isn't what it truly is, etc.

EDIT: The post I was replying to disappeared. The OP wrote that he's "not trying to encourage fraud".

 

[kingbuzzie]

M

If you re-read the thread there were several people that understood, and magically were able not to come off insulting me. I noticed you ignored them and hyper focused on me. I think you are just mad that I brought something up you don't like.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Taking unfair advantage of others... you're right, we don't like that.

 

[kingbuzzie]

Taking unfair advantage of others... you're right, we don't like that.

Again, that's not what I said

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Of course not. You wrote (emphasis mine): "Iknow that many old cameras are sold in the vintage section of ebay, and with that you "get what you get and you don't throw a fit". I also see that there are plenty of cameras sold in the regular photography section that theoretically should be covered by ebay guarantee that it is as listed (working / condition). But then I see many listers in that section are stating "not tested" "not sure if it works" etc. Has anyone taken advantage of this to buy a camera, test it and send it back if it doesn't work? Seller can't object since they didn't post it as vintage. Is that underhanded? Also I really have a feeling some unethical sellers list cameras as "untested" because they know they are broken. Has anyone run into this issue, and if it went to the ebay arbitrator do they have protections for selling something "not tested" in a section for fully functioning cameras?"

You asked for opinions. You received our opinions. You reject them because all you really want is confirmation and a 'green light' to do what you're going to do anyway. You're not getting that go-ahead and are arguing until you think we'll cave in to morally nefarious activity. Some will side with you. Most will not.

 

[faberryman]

What sort of internal moral compass do you have that would allow you to rely on the advice of some anonymous person on the internet to do something you know is ethically dubious.

 

[kingbuzzie]

Of course not. You wrote (emphasis mine): "Iknow that many old cameras are sold in the vintage section of ebay, and with that you "get what you get and you don't throw a fit". I also see that there are plenty of cameras sold in the regular photography section that theoretically should be covered by ebay guarantee that it is as listed (working / condition). But then I see many listers in that section are stating "not tested" "not sure if it works" etc. Has anyone taken advantage of this to buy a camera, test it and send it back if it doesn't work? Seller can't object since they didn't post it as vintage. Is that underhanded? Also I really have a feeling some unethical sellers list cameras as "untested" because they know they are broken. Has anyone run into this issue, and if it went to the ebay arbitrator do they have protections for selling something "not tested" in a section for fully functioning cameras?"

Yeah, advantage of eBay protection of someone selling an untested camera as used working. And is it underhanded

Of course not. You wrote (emphasis mine): "Iknow that many old cameras are sold in the vintage section of ebay, and with that you "get what you get and you don't throw a fit". I also see that there are plenty of cameras sold in the regular photography section that theoretically should be covered by ebay guarantee that it is as listed (working / condition). But then I see many listers in that section are stating "not tested" "not sure if it works" etc. Has anyone taken advantage of this to buy a camera, test it and send it back if it doesn't work? Seller can't object since they didn't post it as vintage. Is that underhanded? Also I really have a feeling some unethical sellers list cameras as "untested" because they know they are broken. Has anyone run into this issue, and if it went to the ebay arbitrator do they have protections for selling something "not tested" in a section for fully functioning cameras?"

You asked for opinions. You received our opinions. You reject them because all you really want is confirmation and a 'green light' to do what you're going to do anyway. You're not getting that go-ahead and are arguing until you think we'll cave in to morally nefarious activity. Some will side with you. Most will not.

You don't seem to understand how debate works... Ok no wonder. I am done.

 

[OptiKen]

Sell has to be careful and not list it as USED. Even if they say 'untested' in the description, eBay's definition of USED is an item that is used but working

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

The seller may not know if the item works. Listing it as "parts, not working" is then unfair to the seller because few buyers will be interested in an item if it's listed as "parts, not working" so they won't even look at that item. Read the description. It doesn't matter to the buyer anyway if the textual description and images are honest. Anyway, all a buyer must do is file an "item not as described case" and eBay will support the buyer even if the item is in like-new condition and functions flawlessly.

It seems that some people want a one-way street only in their direction.

 

[BrianShaw]

...
What's your eBay moniker?

Rather than this continual harassment, why don't you post yours so he can avoid you. Same effect - he won't have to deal with you, nor you with him.

 

[fstop]

Don A. just wants to harass sellers. Hes not interested in buying. ebays so called rules and accepted practice can be in a grey area. I've never had an auction pulled for listing a camera body as untested, if it doesn't work I put it in parts, but I won't list cameras, that need only seals and batteries as they are consumables~ normal wear items, in parts or non working.
Like everyone else it is stated in the description it may need seals and batteries.
To fully test a cameras you need several flash units to test hot shoe functions this is especially true of Minoltas made in the late 70s, you also need to test with lenses and winders/motor drives. Then run a couple rolls of film and use a shutter speed tester.
So according to this drivel unless a seller is selling a complete system they are trying to hoodwink the buyer? You want to spend 150 on a AE-1? fine I'll test it. or you can pay 25 for working and untested.
Let ebay police itself

 

[BrianShaw]

5 pages and 111 posts.

What on earth are all you people smoking?

Drinking, my Lord, not smoking.

 

[BrianShaw]

Drinking, my Lord, not smoking.

Scotch. Two rocks.

 

[fstop]

Rather than this continual harassment, why don't you post yours so he can avoid you. Same effect - he won't have to deal with you, nor you with him.

No we want to tease him with great deals on great cameras that work just fine and then thumb our nose at him.
every category I sell in, I hit the related forums, there are always ebay trolls and "experts" scheming ways of harassing sellers or getting refunds or trying to get stuff for free.
Cameras is not the worst category for this garbage.

 

[kingbuzzie]

Don A. just wants to harass sellers. Hes not interested in buying. ebays so called rules and accepted practice can be in a grey area. I've never had an auction pulled for listing a camera body as untested, if it doesn't work I put it in parts, but I won't list cameras, that need only seals and batteries as they are consumables~ normal wear items, in parts or non working.
Like everyone else it is stated in the description it may need seals and batteries.
To fully test a cameras you need several flash units to test hot shoe functions this is especially true of Minoltas made in the late 70s, you also need to test with lenses and winders/motor drives. Then run a couple rolls of film and use a shutter speed tester.
So according to this drivel unless a seller is selling a complete system they are trying to hoodwink the buyer? You want to spend 150 on a AE-1? fine I'll test it. or you can pay 25 for working and untested.
Let ebay police itself

I haven't bought a camera in two years, not shopping for a camera, and my eBay rating is impeccable as both seller and buyer. I think you have issues that extend far beyond me, and I think it best Ill just bow out with that.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Rather than this continual harassment, why don't you post yours so he can avoid you. Same effect - he won't have to deal with you, nor you with him.

big_cam

The problem with this is the antagonist can now buy an item and cause me harm as a seller. If I knew his moniker I could block him as a buyer without causing him any harm.

 

[BrianShaw]

big_cam

The problem with this is the antagonist can now buy an item and cause me harm as a seller. If I knew his moniker I could block him as a buyer without causing him any harm.

Don't flatter yourself. I don't think anyone really wants to expend energy like that. I could be wrong but I doubt it.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Brian, I have a pretty solid middle-of-the-road opinion of myself so I'm not the self-flattering type. What I do know is some people will strike at others who they think disrespected them somehow. It's not a 'me' thing. It's an 'I know what some people are like' thing. Not that the OP would do that but, people being people, some will.

 

[Sean]

I think this has run it's course, if you guys want to take it offline via the pm/conversation system be my guest.