Need to rant for a minute about a seller - no need to open

[ThoseBackPages]

id seriously like to know how ONE sale can "destroy" this sellers DSR?

 

[i43770]

The fact that you went through the effort speaks volumes. Did you know that you could cost him money? If you weren't aware of the policy that's one thing...but if you knew that it could possible lower his rating than shame on you.

You paid less than a dollar and felt the need to admonish this guy. I don't know how old you are...I am guessing under 17, but karma will come back to you.

Just my thoughts
Mark

I didn't know that it could cost him money. But I don't feel my selection on the DSR would have changed if I had known. If he is going to be selling vintage, and not say anything about creases that are in the card, that is wrong, it doesn't matter how much the card sells for.

 

[js0000001]

I try to only sell graded cards to avoid this

 

[ffgameman]

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

 

[Craig - 21hawk]

You fracking posters that are saying you are going to block the buyer are losers. The seller didn't describe the creases and and you are faulting the buyer for noting it??? A-fracking-mazing!!!

This seller clearly has a couple of screws loose, but to claim he didn't describe the creases when they were clearly visible doesn't make sense. To argue the picture is not part of the description is incomprehensible. Picture is much more descriptive than a statement that there is a blemish.

That said, blocking the buyer is stupid too.

Craig

 

[i43770]

You fracking posters that are saying you are going to block the buyer are losers. The seller didn't describe the creases and and you are faulting the buyer for noting it??? A-fracking-mazing!!!

Losers... nice. So someone is selling a card that is ripped in half and is pictured as such, you think it is within reason to leave a low DSR if the seller didn't mention in the description that the card is ripped in half? A-FRACKING-MAZING!!! But seriously, what seller wants to be at the mercy of HYPER nit-picky individuals that can cost you money because they have a hard time comprehending reality or eBay common sense? Not me.

The reason I don't look at pictures and work off of descriptions is because if someone links a picture from their photobucket and delete the picture or move it after it sells, I won't have any picture to compare to when I get the card in the mail. So when I buy vintage if there isn't a detailed description, I will copy the picture to my computer, but when there is, I go off of that.

 

[i43770]

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

Yes it is.

 

[daveyou]

You fracking posters that are saying you are going to block the buyer are losers. The seller didn't describe the creases and and you are faulting the buyer for noting it??? A-fracking-mazing!!!

condition of the card described on the auction stated fair to good which is what, psa 1 to 2?

to me, that is 110% accurate that the seller described. what the hell more does the seller have to describe here?

i blocked this ****** the 1st minute i read his other post. you know why? i look at people like this who complains and whines about every single little thing in this world blaming every single little thing to the other party like there is absolutely no fault of oneself. people like that disgusts me. i could count 5-10 different ways he could've handled this situation with the seller (the most common thing that about 99.9% of the general population would do of course, is to just let it go). me, loser? hardly

why people want to block him? there's nothing i would hide but i am not going to sit and type every single detailed description on the auction and pray to God so that i can fool people like him that he didn't notice a sand sized scratch on the card.

dave

 

[sportscardtheory]

You fracking posters that are saying you are going to block the buyer are losers. The seller didn't describe the creases and and you are faulting the buyer for noting it??? A-fracking-mazing!!!

Losers... nice. So someone is selling a card that is ripped in half and is pictured as such, you think it is within reason to leave a low DSR if the seller didn't mention in the description that the card is ripped in half? A-FRACKING-MAZING!!! But seriously, what seller wants to be at the mercy of HYPER nit-picky individuals that can cost you money because they have a hard time comprehending reality or eBay common sense? Not me.

The reason I don't look at pictures and work off of descriptions is because if someone links a picture from their photobucket and delete the picture or move it after it sells, I won't have any picture to compare to when I get the card in the mail. So when I buy vintage if there isn't a detailed description, I will copy the picture to my computer, but when there is, I go off of that.

I understand this... but you still received the card in the scan, and almost every single person here said they saw the creases you claim you couldn't see. You got exactly what you paid for, and you still knocked down the seller's DSR. Not cool.

 

[steve-a-reno]

Funny how you felt the need to post basically the exact same post tonight as you did yesterday, just because you didn't get people to agree with you. Also funny how you took the pictures off the old post and didn't bother putting them on this thread. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=46133&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I will say taking out the pictures this time really changed the reactions you're getting, so I guess you got what you wanted. Plain and simple, I agree with sportscardtheory, the creases were plain as day obvious in the pictures of the card for you to see. You stole the card anyway and then complained about the condition which you know you saw unless you're blind. WOW...

 

[sportscardtheory]

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

Yes it is.

I don't think so.

 

[matfanofold]

I have to be honest here, and that is I am in somewhat disbelief. Despite the description being less than exacting, there was a scan of the card that showed EXACTLY what it looked like. And from what I remember, the description did not lie, but rather pointed out some of the flaws that were not clearly shown in the scan, like the creases. And he correctly called the card quality within the description as well...

Now, after taking in all that the op has said, and all that has been commented, I just can not understand how the op expected anything more than what the scan, combined with the description, clearly put forth. I guess that puts me on the side of the fence that thinks the op should be blocked by anyone who wants to avoid buyers that want and/or expecting something more than what they are clearly buying.

There is no principal here, there is only buyers remorse for purchasing and recieving a card without taking the time to comprehend what was CLEARLY being sold. And now he is trying to blame a less than 'novel like' description for his lack of photo comprehention.

I just can not see how anyone would look at this situation as anything but a hassle for the seller.

 

[matfanofold]

You fracking posters that are saying you are going to block the buyer are losers. The seller didn't describe the creases and and you are faulting the buyer for noting it??? A-fracking-mazing!!!

Did you actually see the auction link? The scan?

He did not describe it as cardboard eithor but low and behold...

 

[ffgameman]

It is, I checked the topic.

Gilmo's situation was the opposite - cubnut was the buyer and claimed the cards Chris sent were damaged, but took no picture or scan to prove it.

If I was in the OP's situation I would have let it go (something similar happened to me but I let it go as it was my fault I didn't see damage). But, I still can't believe the overall disgust toward him with hardly no comment towards the seller's attitude - particularly his comment to "get even".

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

Yes it is.

I don't think so.

 

[i43770]

Funny how you felt the need to post basically the exact same post tonight as you did yesterday, just because you didn't get people to agree with you. Also funny how you took the pictures off the old post and didn't bother putting them on this thread. http://freedomcardboard.com/forum/viewt ... &sk=t&sd=a

I will say taking out the pictures this time really changed the reactions you're getting, so I guess you got what you wanted. Plain and simple, I agree with sportscardtheory, the creases were plain as day obvious in the pictures of the card for you to see. You stole the card anyway and then complained about the condition which you know you saw unless you're blind. WOW...

The last post was asking for advice about what I should do. People told me to not do anything. But I left feedback and used the DSR system like it is meant to be used. I'm not trying to hide anything. I'm not looking for anything from anyone. I have never claimed this was a different transaction.

Here is the auction [ebay:3kou6mhm]250420291560[/ebay:3kou6mhm]

 

[sportscardtheory]

It is, I checked the topic.

Gilmo's situation was the opposite - cubnut was the buyer and claimed the cards Chris sent were damaged, but took no picture or scan to prove it.

If I was in the OP's situation I would have let it go (something similar happened to me but I let it go as it was my fault I didn't see damage). But, I still can't believe the overall disgust toward him with hardly no comment towards the seller's attitude - particularly his comment to "get even".

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

Yes it is.

I don't think so.

I may be wrong, but I am fairly certain the seller was not cubnut. Gilmore commented about his situation in that thread, but it was not the same eBayer that sold to the OP here.

 

[ffgameman]

Right here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=44698&hilit=cubnut

And you can search the OP's feedback history through eBay to find it was cubnut.

It is, I checked the topic.

Gilmo's situation was the opposite - cubnut was the buyer and claimed the cards Chris sent were damaged, but took no picture or scan to prove it.

If I was in the OP's situation I would have let it go (something similar happened to me but I let it go as it was my fault I didn't see damage). But, I still can't believe the overall disgust toward him with hardly no comment towards the seller's attitude - particularly his comment to "get even".

Wow. I'm not so certain if the DSR was needed but I can't believe some of the comments toward you. You're not the one basically cussing someone out or overreacting about something like the seller did.

By the way, I think this is the same seller who gave cgilmo trouble.

Yes it is.

I don't think so.

I may be wrong, but I am fairly certain the seller was not cubnut. Gilmore commented about his situation in that thread, but it was not the same eBayer that sold to the OP here.

 

[P_Manning 18]

[ebay:1nbpwofg]250420291560[/ebay:1nbpwofg]

Auction is question. his DSRs are still good.... Shipping and Handeling charges is 4.7.... but 1 of 322 wouldnt lower it much at all.... so that was already an issue.

 

[steve-a-reno]

Funny how you felt the need to post basically the exact same post tonight as you did yesterday, just because you didn't get people to agree with you. Also funny how you took the pictures off the old post and didn't bother putting them on this thread. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=46133&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I will say taking out the pictures this time really changed the reactions you're getting, so I guess you got what you wanted. Plain and simple, I agree with sportscardtheory, the creases were plain as day obvious in the pictures of the card for you to see. You stole the card anyway and then complained about the condition which you know you saw unless you're blind. WOW...

The last post was asking for advice about what I should do. People told me to not do anything. But I left feedback and used the DSR system like it is meant to be used. I'm not trying to hide anything. I'm not looking for anything from anyone. I have never claimed this was a different transaction.

Its the exact same transcation, set of circumstances, etc., period. You didn't like the responses last night so you took down the pictures that were the proof that you're unreasonable and asked again tonight with out them and with the added seller response. The seller might be nuts, but that doesn't change the fact that you saw the creases, got a hell of a deal, yet still found the need to whine and complain. Hilarious......I'll be blocking you as well.

 

[i43770]

http://freedomcardboard.com/forum/viewt ... &sk=t&sd=a[/url]

I will say taking out the pictures this time really changed the reactions you're getting, so I guess you got what you wanted. Plain and simple, I agree with sportscardtheory, the creases were plain as day obvious in the pictures of the card for you to see. You stole the card anyway and then complained about the condition which you know you saw unless you're blind. WOW...

The last post was asking for advice about what I should do. People told me to not do anything. But I left feedback and used the DSR system like it is meant to be used. I'm not trying to hide anything. I'm not looking for anything from anyone. I have never claimed this was a different transaction.

Its the exact same transcation, set of circumstances, etc., period. You didn't like the responses last night so you took down the pictures that were the proof that you're unreasonable and asked again tonight with out them and with the added seller response. The seller might be nuts, but that doesn't change the fact that you saw the creases, got a hell of a deal, yet still found the need to whine and complain. Hilarious......I'll be blocking you as well.[/quote:aoj5yz9o]

I haven't said it wasn't the same transaction. It was two nights ago I edited that, before I left feedback.