• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

An ebay category / ethical question

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
202,907
Messages
2,847,376
Members
101,534
Latest member
michaelhfreeman
Recent bookmarks
0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well maybe I shouldn't feel so bad about returning a broken camera if the seller is basically it both works and doesn't to cover both senarios.

In all seriousness I think what should be focused on is the camera's description and the photos provided. Many people sell cameras and a lot do not know the ins and outs of all of them. If an items clearly states untested then I would expect a gamble unless talking to the seller. To take and return a camera that is untested because it is marked as "used" and not "for parts" when it clearly says that the camera is untested is childish to say the least. That is unless arrangements have been made with the seller. Buyer beware.
 
I think pro sellers who li

Wait, but eBay also says clearly a used camera should work. So then isn't the seller trying to game the system? He/she knows it might not work but is putting in the working section by default.
 
If working and tested are seperate, are you saying it can be both untested and working? Then if I buy a untested camera and it doesn't work I can safely send it back because it isn't as described. How's that fraud then?

It depends on the textual and image content of the listing. If the seller clearly states "unknown/untested" and "as is" and the images are accurate. Then yes, you (morally) take the risk. Greed and selfishness... it's the American way.

So... what's your eBay moniker?
 
Wait, but eBay also says clearly a used camera should work. So then isn't the seller trying to game the system? He/she knows it might not work but is putting in the working section by default.

Edit:
It depends on the textual and image content of the listing. If the seller clearly states "unknown/untested" and "as is" and the images are accurate. Then yes, you (morally) take the risk. Greed and selfishness... it's the American way.

So... what's your eBay moniker?

He said it better then I did.
 
Wait, but eBay also says clearly a used camera should work. So then isn't the seller trying to game the system? He/she knows it might not work but is putting in the working section by default.

Perhaps... perhaps not. So you condemn "gaming the system" when you're asking about doing the same but only to your advantage... it's okay if you're on the winning end. That's called hypocrisy.
 
You folks have great stamina. Still arguing over a hypothetical rather than buying cameras or using cameras. har har har.
 
Wait, but eBay also says clearly a used camera should work. So then isn't the seller trying to game the system? He/she knows it might not work but is putting in the working section by default.

It seems to me that you have made up your mind on the subject.

You folks have great stamina. Still arguing over a hypothetical rather than buying cameras or using cameras. har har har.

As Mr. Shaw suggests it's time to start using cameras and leave this alone - Or maybe I'll buy and untested camera and knowingly take a risk. It's been a while since I played the lotto.
 
You're right, Brian. This is a waste of time. We can discuss and argue all day but will never alter the flawed morals and ideals of those who just want to "game the system" for only their own selfish benefit.

Yes, Mr B... the OP made up his mind long before starting this thread. He was seeking an "atta boy... pat on the back... you go for it, dude... etc." from the rest of us.

Sorry, OP. Morally speaking, you're outnumbered.
 
Perhaps... perhaps not. So you condemn "gauming the system" when you're asking about doing the same but only to your advantage... it's okay if you're on the winning end. That's called hypocrisy.

I love how I'm being insulted for a completely hypothetical of which I've already said multiple I've never done. Time to ignore some people I guess.
 
I love how I'm being insulted for a completely hypothetical of which I've already said multiple I've never done. Time to ignore some people I guess.

Hypothetically speaking... your example is immoral. I don't mind being ignored by some people. I consider it a compliment.
 
Well maybe I shouldn't feel so bad about returning a broken camera if the seller is basically it both works and doesn't to cover both senarios.

but i thought this was merely hypothetical and you didnt even want a camera or is that merely a hypothetical "feel so bad"? show us the original listing.

so you know its fundamentally lame but you are looking for some justification for doing it and the best you can do is some weasely workout around that the seller ticked the incorrect descriptor box even tho the listing clearly says untested to make yourself feel better. Yes?

utterly grueling
 
but i thought this was merely hypothetical and you didnt even want a camera or is that merely a hypothetical "feel so bad"? show us the original listing.

so you know its fundamentally lame but you are looking for some justification for doing it and the best you can do is some weasely workout around that the seller ticked the incorrect descriptor box even tho the listing clearly says untested to make yourself feel better. Yes?

utterly grueling

Yeah....that isn't what the discussion was about.
 
5 pages and 111 posts.

What on earth are all you people smoking?
 
And darned miss out on all you $25 lens caps? What if I need a $75 52mm filter?

For the second time... I researched prices and priced mine lower. But I erred and apologized for that in your WTB thread. Historically speaking, Schneider caps are common and cheap. Rodenstock caps are not. Good grief... some people are just plain 'stoopit'.
 
Hypothetically speaking... your example is immoral. I don't mind being ignored by some people. I consider it a compliment.

I piss off stupid people too.

just as there are bad sellers there are bad buyers. People are always trying scam sellers and justify it with some bs. The ebay wannabe police are the worst they aren't there to buy, they are there to harass sellers, its their hobby.
If you are too cheap to buy from a regular dealer who tests used equipment then don't buy.

but please give u your ebay user name so we can block you from our auctions.
 
5 pages and 111 posts.

What on earth are all you people smoking?
I brought a complete hypothetical about the ethics of sellers posting working cameras ass untested and if it would be wrong to send one back that degraded into me stealing parts off the camera first then taking a dump in the box before sending it back with a note that says "yo momma".
 
but i thought this was merely hypothetical and you didnt even want a camera or is that merely a hypothetical "feel so bad"? show us the original listing.

so you know its fundamentally lame but you are looking for some justification for doing it and the best you can do is some weasely workout around that the seller ticked the incorrect descriptor box even tho the listing clearly says untested to make yourself feel better. Yes?

utterly grueling

Yeah....that isn't what the discussion was about.

Oh... but it was/is.
 
Last edited:
I piss off stupid people too.

just as there are bad sellers there are bad buyers. People are always trying scam sellers and justify it with some bs. The ebay wannabe police are the worst they aren't there to buy, they are there to harass sellers, its their hobby.
If you are too cheap to buy from a regular dealer who tests used equipment then don't buy.

but please give u your ebay user name so we can block you from our auctions.

Yes, pleeeeeeeze!
 
If working and tested are seperate, are you saying it can be both untested and working? Then if I buy a untested camera and it doesn't work I can safely send it back because it isn't as described. How's that fraud then?

Normally the wording would be something like: "It appears to work, the lens rotates, the lever advances, but I don't know if it works well"

Somebody selling second-hand an object that he doesn't know (be it a camera, a clock, a car) cannot check its functionality properly, but will say "for what I see, it seems to work". Then, the rangefinder might be out of tune, the lens can be fogged, the focusing ring will have some problems, the lens will have some play, the camera can have any sort of problem, the gasket might leak, and the seller can be in good faith. You don't expect somebody selling a camera, these days, to actually take pictures with it in all conditions and test it properly.

On the other hand, it's with this kind of "not guaranteed" items that the best bargains are realized.

The information that the camera appears to work is in any case precious. You can ask questions to the seller, for instance, if there are evident scratches on the lens (this is something the uninitiated would not think about checking, and actually would not know how to check properly).

Most people would not be able to actually open the back of the camera. It's not that they want it "both ways" and are trying to cheat the buyer. Most of the times they are honestly ignorant.
 
Last edited:
I brought a complete hypothetical about the ethics of sellers posting working cameras ass untested and if it would be wrong to send one back that degraded into me stealing parts off the camera first then taking a dump in the box before sending it back with a note that says "yo momma".

No-o-o-o-o... it did not degrade to the accusations you just wrote. Please stop twisting our words to make yourself feel better. We're trying to answer your original question. You asked about returning items that are properly described but are listed in the "working" category but don't match your ideal of "working". You want to buy items and return them under some silly "they didn't click that checkbox" stupidity even though the textual and graphical description is honest and accurate. That's just wrong.

What's your eBay moniker?
 
No-o-o-o-o... it did not degrade to the accusations you just wrote. Please stop twisting our words to make yourself feel better. We're trying to answer your original question. You asked about returning items that are properly described but are listed in the "working" category but don't match your ideal of "working". You want to buy items and return them under some silly "they didn't click that checkbox" stupidity even though the textual and graphical description is honest and accurate. That's just wrong.

What's your eBay moniker?

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.
 
I brought a complete hypothetical about the ethics of sellers posting working cameras ass untested and if it would be wrong to send one back that degraded into me stealing parts off the camera first then taking a dump in the box before sending it back with a note that says "yo momma".
you may have missed my point.
ntw
 
I brought a complete hypothetical about the ethics of sellers posting working cameras ass untested and if it would be wrong to send one back that degraded into me stealing parts off the camera first then taking a dump in the box before sending it back with a note that says "yo momma".

Well Don, you have insulted a few guys that are good sellers, do you expect a to get the warm fuzzies?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom