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

[KandKCards]

my latest email from cubnut after he saw my feedback reply


Never fails to amaze me the capacity for self-deception that southerners can engage in. Southern honor my ass.



You got the cards back. You saw the chips in the cases and yet you follow-up with the *censor* inferring buyers remorse. Only southerners who justified slavery for hundreds of years and then followed it up with the brutal repression and racism you engaged in for another 100+ years can continue to lie and obfuscate the way you have so skillfully.



If that's honor, you can have it.


my reply

nice, way to put slavery all on me


Yep, 200 years of oppression all my fault.







No clue what planet this guy lives on.

Haven't read any of this thread, but legitimately laughed out loud at this post.
Kind of funny, a guy who is apparently a fan of team from one of the most corrupt cities in the country telling someone off that way :lol:

 

[Musial Collector]

Daveyou is going to block me I am sooooo sad. Like you would sell anything I would buy anyways. Seriously I love these threads where members show their true colors.

I just read this entire 5 pg thread & I have to say that the one who's shown thier "true color's" is you. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it you who started with the childish name calling (even though this thread has nothing to do with you)? :|

Really? So by these other posters that state, "can I have your ebay ID so I can block you" is not showing their true colors? I admit I called them losers, AFTER they stated they were going to block the OP. AGAIN, AFTER the fact!!!

Honestly, if the seller is going to take the time to state the following...
"Has rounded corners with a tiny bit of paper loss on back. There is a small bit of pencil writing on the back. Has excellent color and centering. "
...I ask, how ******* hard it is to mention the creases???
Be honest folks, dont pussyfoot around the issue here.

 

[cgilmo]

cubnut issues aside


DSR's are opinions, and the OP is entitled to his. If he feels the seller did a poor job, well then thats up to him to express that. The problem is not with people using low DSR's, its with ebay's star rating system.

 

[jmc280zx]

My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

 

[i43770]

My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

 

[Musial Collector]

My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the ******, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

 

[i43770]

My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the ******, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

It is because the card was won for .99.

 

[jmc280zx]

[quote="BunchOBull":34wo4oay]My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the *censored*, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

It is because the card was won for .99.[/quote:34wo4oay]
No its because you can CLEARLY see the creases in the picture..

I am in not way defending what the seller has done in the past or how he reponded to the OP about getting back at him...

BUT

The picture is and sould be used as part of the description and IT IS the OP fault for not looking at the picture in detail..

In all my auctions I only list what the card is what set it comes from what # it is and the player/s are on the card. If there is any question about the cards condition look at the picture or ask a question. Condition is to subjective. What I may think is mint some one else may not. I am not a professional grader and it is only my opinion of the condition of said card.

 

[Musial Collector]

[quote="BunchOBull":2zvjvk5k]My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the *censored*, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

It is because the card was won for .99.[/quote:2zvjvk5k]

That should not make any difference, whether it was .99 or 99.99, sellers need to be held accountable, which is what you did.
One of Ebay's DSRs is as follows:
How accurate was the items description?
5 stars = Very accurate. --In my book this would be 100% as described.--
4 stars = Accurate. --In my book, this would be 75-99% accurate, that being leaving somethings out of the description.--
3 stars = Neither accurate nor inaccurate. --In my book, this would be 50-74% accurate, that being leaving quite a few items out of the description.--
No need to go to 2 and 1 stars.

 

[Musial Collector]

[quote="i43770":2aprf4e4][quote="BunchOBull":2aprf4e4]My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the *censored*, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

It is because the card was won for .99.[/quote:2aprf4e4]
No its because you can CLEARLY see the creases in the picture..

I am in not way defending what the seller has done in the past or how he reponded to the OP about getting back at him...

BUT

The picture is and sould be used as part of the description and IT IS the OP fault for not looking at the picture in detail.. [/quote:2aprf4e4]

********!
Seller also states, "NOT responsible for lost and uninsured mail."
So if you never receive the item, are you going to file a chargeback, or go, oh well, sellers says I am at fault, I guess I am screwed?

In all my auctions I only list what the card is what set it comes from what # it is and the player/s are on the card. If there is any question about the cards condition look at the picture or ask a question. Condition is to subjective. What I may think is mint some one else may not. I am not a professional grader and it is only my opinion of the condition of said card.

As a seller, you need to state in your auctions, any questions, please ask, as all sales are final, or something along that line. If you do not, you are leaving yourself open for a chargeback. If the buyer really wanted too, he would win a chargeback 100% in this case. The creases were not listed in the description, yet they were there. Buyer wins in paypals eyes, sorry to disappoint.

 

[craiger122003]

For 99 cents all this drama OP i hope that is you in your avatar i bet if you would have opened your eyes and looked at the picture you would have either bid anyways or stayed away and if not satisfied why not contact seller and say i am not satisfied over 99 cents i am sure he would have just refunded ::facepalm::

 

[BunchOBull]

As a seller, you need to state in your auctions, any questions, please ask, as all sales are final, or something along that line. If you do not, you are leaving yourself open for a chargeback. If the buyer really wanted too, he would win a chargeback 100% in this case. The creases were not listed in the description, yet they were there. Buyer wins in paypals eyes, sorry to disappoint.

I'm not disagreeing here, but the buyer wins in PayPal's eyes with or without a "complete" discription. The buyer can simply start the process, ship the item back with DC and insurance, and PP will refund.

 

[jmc280zx]

[quote="Musial Collector":7f5imm44]

[quote="i43770":7f5imm44][quote="BunchOBull":7f5imm44]My only question is (if it has been asked, please ignore me)...what if the description said something like:

"Please examine the pictures to determine the item's condition and bid accordingly. If you have any specific questions about this item's condition, feel free to ask."

Would the seller be negligent? Would the seller deserve less than 5 stars?

I would have probably gave him a 5, because if I didn't notice the creases at that point and/or didn't ask about something, it would have been my fault.

So since the seller did not tell you to look at the picture it is his fault not yours that you did not look at the picture?????????????

No, I looked at the picture. I saw the items he described and put my bid in. I didn't take the time to analyze the picture. Yes, everyone who has looked at it has seen the creases, but they were also looking for them, and if they read my last post about this card, knew where to look for them.

Dont worry about it. Anyone sticking up for the seller would use the same shady practices. That being to "semi-describe" the item and then "blame the buyer for not looking at the picture to get a better idea of the item for sale."

I am still amazed that ANY collector on this board is defending the seller. It seems EVERY day there is a thread on here that has a buyer complaining about receiving an item that was not as described and the majority of posters say to neg the *censored*, kill his/her DSR's. But not tonight. Why is that???

It is because the card was won for .99.[/quote:7f5imm44]
No its because you can CLEARLY see the creases in the picture..

I am in not way defending what the seller has done in the past or how he reponded to the OP about getting back at him...

BUT

The picture is and sould be used as part of the description and IT IS the OP fault for not looking at the picture in detail.. [/quote:7f5imm44]

*censor*!
Seller also states, "NOT responsible for lost and uninsured mail."
So if you never receive the item, are you going to file a chargeback, or go, oh well, sellers says I am at fault, I guess I am screwed?

In all my auctions I only list what the card is what set it comes from what # it is and the player/s are on the card. If there is any question about the cards condition look at the picture or ask a question. Condition is to subjective. What I may think is mint some one else may not. I am not a professional grader and it is only my opinion of the condition of said card.

As a seller, you need to state in your auctions, any questions, please ask, as all sales are final, or something along that line. If you do not, you are leaving yourself open for a chargeback. If the buyer really wanted too, he would win a chargeback 100% in this case. The creases were not listed in the description, yet they were there. Buyer wins in paypals eyes, sorry to disappoint.[/quote:7f5imm44]

I thought we were talking about the condition of a card and DSR rating. Not charge backs... But I guess I was wrong...

And FYI it does not matter what you put in your auctions about "sold as is" "seller not responsible for lost or stolen mail" "all sales final" if a buyer says it is "not as described" to Paypal the buyer is correct and will win..

 

[sportscardtheory]

Most sellers don't scan the backs of cards... so is it on the seller to describe in the listing that it has a back? Would the OP and Musial Collector give lower DSRs if the back of the card was not mentioned in the description?

 

[Musial Collector]

Most sellers don't scan the backs of cards... so is it on the seller to describe in the listing that it has a back? Would the OP and Musial Collector give lower DSRs if the back of the card was not mentioned in the description?

You have to have the most pointless posts in this thread, but I will play along.

If I am buying a 48 Bowman of Musial, where there is the possibility of wax stains on the back of the card, I would expect the seller to mention the staining if it was there. Wouldnt you???

If there are stains and they are not mentioned, should I give 5 stars, or 4 stars, or 3 stars, or how about 2 or 1 stars.
You tell me.

 

[sportscardtheory]

Most sellers don't scan the backs of cards... so is it on the seller to describe in the listing that it has a back? Would the OP and Musial Collector give lower DSRs if the back of the card was not mentioned in the description?

You have to have the most pointless posts in this thread, but I will play along.

If I am buying a 48 Bowman of Musial, where there is the possibility of wax stains on the back of the card, I would expect the seller to mention the staining if it was there. Wouldnt you???

If there are stains and they are not mentioned, should I give 5 stars, or 4 stars, or 3 stars, or how about 2 or 1 stars.
You tell me.

At least I'm not name calling.

I'm not talking about mentioning faults of the card. You seem to need everything pointed out to you... I was just curious if you needed to be told there was a reverse side on the card you would be purchasing.

 

[Big Mac McGwire]

this was a great read. If you bought a .99 cent card from me then gave me a headache, i just might come to your residence and throw burning dog poop at your door. J/K. Funny stuff though man

 

[Musial Collector]

Most sellers don't scan the backs of cards... so is it on the seller to describe in the listing that it has a back? Would the OP and Musial Collector give lower DSRs if the back of the card was not mentioned in the description?

You have to have the most pointless posts in this thread, but I will play along.

If I am buying a 48 Bowman of Musial, where there is the possibility of wax stains on the back of the card, I would expect the seller to mention the staining if it was there. Wouldnt you???

If there are stains and they are not mentioned, should I give 5 stars, or 4 stars, or 3 stars, or how about 2 or 1 stars.
You tell me.

At least I'm not name calling.

I'm not talking about mentioning faults of the card. You seem to need everything pointed out to you... I was just curious if you needed to be told there was a reverse side on the card you would be purchasing.

Oh, did I hurt your feelings?

Cant wait till you get ****** over on a card, whether it is .99, 9.99, 99.99 or 999.99, I will ******* bash you when you come in here crying fowl looking for any type of sympathy.

 

[Musial Collector]

Peace out to all (sans sportscardtheory), it has been a fun discussion.

:grouphug:

 

[flightposite]

I think it's hilarious that a .99 cent auction churned out a 7+ page thread.

First, the people saying the buyer was in the wrong for knocking the DSR because the auction was only .99 cents... The price should have nothing to do with it, bottom line.

Second, if you are going to say that the buyer is wrong because the creases are clear as day... The seller went to the trouble of noting everything else wrong with the card beside the creases, so I could see the gripe here.

In my shoes, it takes quite a bit for me to not leave five stars. eBay is retarded and so unless I totally get the shaft on something, i'm not going to knock someone and wouldn't have done so here.

Where the seller loses any side of his case with me is how he responded after getting knocked. 100% wrong.

Hell, it's not like the guy gave him negative feedback.