First bad Gunbroker experience

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by QuakertownRich

. . . If buyer has contacted seller, sent all info needed, along with payment that has cleared the bank, he is done. His feedback IS NOT in correlation with how YOU as the seller proceeds from there, that is feedback blackmail! . . .



No, it's that he paid promptly, communicated quickly, and supplied all documentation in timely fashion. Your trying to justify your own procedure of feedback blackmail.

. . . .

I pulled two salient points from your post; first, you don't need to attack Kayland personally just because he disagrees with you. I disagree with you, too, and I never sell on Gunbroker, so what am I trying to justify?

Second, you're wrong that the seller's opinion of the buyer has to be based solely on what he does up to the point where the seller is paid. As an example, let's say that you sell tires for a living. A customer comes in, pays cash, selects 4 tires, you put them on, and he drives off. Then he calls every day for the next week, demanding new valve stems. And he thinks that the white walls are too narrow. And he accuses your clerk of short-changing him. Plus, he's telling all your friends that your tires suck. Now, are you ALLOWED to have an opinion of that buyer that's based on anything that happens after he pays the invoice?

Of course you are. If the buyer annoys the Hell out of you after the sale, he's not as good a buyer as someone who doesn't annoy you.

As a side note, how honorable is it to try to blindside your trading partner by seeing if you can replace your favorable feedback with negative feedback, too late for him to respond? I mean, if we're taking the high road here, that seems sort of "sneaky", doesn't it? And if the end justifies the means, then we're not playing by any rules.

[Robert Kayland]

Originally Posted by QuakertownRich

No, it's that he paid promptly, communicated quickly, and supplied all documentation in timely fashion. Your trying to justify your own procedure of feedback blackmail.

Sorry you got ripped off by a seller... I have also been ripped off by sellers, but that's not material to the heart of the matter... and I can give you dozens of stories where the buyers tried to make bogus claims and/or held the seller responsible for the shipping service's screw ups.

In short, it's not "feedback blackmail"... it's like I (and GunLawyer) have spelled out explicitly several times already... a method by which a seller can protect his good name... or, at a minimum, ensure that the buyer doesn't get a free ride on the feedback train.

Once again, we are talking GUNBROKER here, NOT ebay. See above for feedback change possibility. This "ENTIRETY" you keep referring back to his merely a masked feedback blackmail, plain and simple.

Fair enough about gunbroker versus eBay, since there are a few differences in how gunbroker allows feedback to be given.

But the point remains: in any case of online transactions, the seller needs to protect his good name to a much greater extent than a buyer, because a buyer with little, no, or even poor feedback can still find sellers who will do business with him, whereas the opposite isn't true to the same extent.

And it's the seller's livelihood at stake, not the buyer's.

I can't make it any clearer than that.

[Robert Kayland]

after I left neg feedback for how item was misrepresented, shipped and condition variance. And don't say "just ship it back" as an answer to being promised Excellent condition! when received is a total turd, and I lose $60 on shipping both ways..not an option.

I violently agree with you here... of the many buying transactions I have had, there have been about 20 where the seller misrepresented the item and I was not happy.

Since as you say, it's a no-win scenario to be out shipping both ways, I contact the seller and explain the situation, and offer a compromise... such as a rebate of a portion of the price in line with what the diminished value of the item was.

In all but two cases, it worked out and we left mutual positive feedback.

In the two instances where the sellers were scoundrelly knaves, I nuked them and yes, they nuked me.... sigh.

The only upside is other potential buyers can usually tell from the exchange and follow-up comments who's telling the truth... especially when checked against each respective combatant's feedback history. In one instance the seller had done it to others in the past, but I wanted the particular item bad enough to take a gamble that his 1100+ transactions that were positive would hold true.

[Robert Kayland]

I can't disagree, although I have to point out that PayPal (and their owner, eBay) hates us gun owners.

Yeah, I know... sigh...

But the whole system of eBay and PayPal is just so damn convenient and at times absolutely necessary in finding things you couldn't get anywhere else, let alone in providing a market for one's own wares.

I've financed my gun and archery hobbies exclusively by being able to wheel and deal on eBay, so even if they don't know it, they're supporting us owners in an indirect way.

I have bought and sold gun-related items on eBay, and I'm thinking they stay away from ammo and firearms proper more for insurance liability reasons than because of any personal politics.

[enfieldshooter303]

the first time i used GB i started as a seller, i put up a NIB chinese sks well some guy bought it but never sent the funds. to this day GB locks all of my accounts because i won't pay then the $26 from the auction. they don't have my back so why should i pay them.

[QuakertownRich]

Originally Posted by GunLawyer001

I pulled two salient points from your post; first, you don't need to attack Kayland personally just because he disagrees with you. I disagree with you, too, and I never sell on Gunbroker, so what am I trying to justify?

Second, you're wrong that the seller's opinion of the buyer has to be based solely on what he does up to the point where the seller is paid. As an example, let's say that you sell tires for a living. A customer comes in, pays cash, selects 4 tires, you put them on, and he drives off. Then he calls every day for the next week, demanding new valve stems. And he thinks that the white walls are too narrow. And he accuses your clerk of short-changing him. Plus, he's telling all your friends that your tires suck. Now, are you ALLOWED to have an opinion of that buyer that's based on anything that happens after he pays the invoice? I've already answered this on MANY occasions, try to follow. Feedback can be changed on gunbroker up to a month after left if you run into such a person. You both are looking for odd scenario to justify your stance, which is wrong. If you thing I'm attack personally with that, get some therapy.

Of course you are. If the buyer annoys the Hell out of you after the sale, he's not as good a buyer as someone who doesn't annoy you.

As a side note, how honorable Honorable? Are you f'n serious? Did you read what he the seller has done? I think sellers such as yourself need to understand it is a two-way street, and not all about you. is it to try to blindside your trading partner by seeing if you can replace your favorable feedback with negative feedback, too late for him to respond? I mean, if we're taking the high road here, that seems sort of "sneaky", doesn't it? And if the end justifies the means, then we're not playing by any rules.

Ridiculous argument and points. By the way, change your name..doesn't bode well for you. Gun_advocate is more palatable.

[GunLawyer001]

Originally Posted by QuakertownRich

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunLawyer001 View Post
I pulled two salient points from your post; first, you don't need to attack Kayland personally just because he disagrees with you. I disagree with you, too, and I never sell on Gunbroker, so what am I trying to justify?

Second, you're wrong that the seller's opinion of the buyer has to be based solely on what he does up to the point where the seller is paid. As an example, let's say that you sell tires for a living. A customer comes in, pays cash, selects 4 tires, you put them on, and he drives off. Then he calls every day for the next week, demanding new valve stems. And he thinks that the white walls are too narrow. And he accuses your clerk of short-changing him. Plus, he's telling all your friends that your tires suck. Now, are you ALLOWED to have an opinion of that buyer that's based on anything that happens after he pays the invoice? I've already answered this on MANY occasions, try to follow. Feedback can be changed on gunbroker up to a month after left if you run into such a person. You both are looking for odd scenario to justify your stance, which is wrong. If you thing I'm attack personally with that, get some therapy.

Of course you are. If the buyer annoys the Hell out of you after the sale, he's not as good a buyer as someone who doesn't annoy you.

As a side note, how honorable Honorable? Are you f'n serious? Did you read what he the seller has done? I think sellers such as yourself need to understand it is a two-way street, and not all about you. is it to try to blindside your trading partner by seeing if you can replace your favorable feedback with negative feedback, too late for him to respond? I mean, if we're taking the high road here, that seems sort of "sneaky", doesn't it? And if the end justifies the means, then we're not playing by any rules.

Ridiculous argument and points. By the way, change your name..doesn't bode well for you. Gun_advocate is more palatable.

Well, it's hard to quote your post after you've bollixed up the formatting, but I think everyone else here is getting a sense of who you are.

You DO believe that the end justifies the means, you say as much. You plan to blindside the seller because you think you're right and he's wrong; in other words, the END of getting back at him justifies the MEANS of sucker-punching him with late feedback. That's what the phrase means. And that's what you're doing. What did you think it meant?

You do personally attack anyone who disagrees with your rage-filled screeds, and you fail to even read their arguments as you fly off the handle. "I think sellers such as yourself need to understand it is a two-way street, and not all about you." Um, dude, did you read where I posted "I never sell on Gunbroker, so what am I trying to justify?" Is there some other way that I could word that to convey the simple concept that I AM NOT A SELLER ON GUNBROKER? Help me out here, I'm trying to communicate.

And despite your friendly advice which assumes that all people despise lawyers and their insidious book learnin' as much as you do, I'll keep the handle, thanks. It "doesn't bode well" for me? I've been posting here since 2006, and it hasn't stopped the intelligent PM's from some smart and witty folks, or the generous dollops of positive well-wishing and rep points.

And as a sign of my general good nature and talent as sage counselor, I give you this, to save you from yourself: http://www.gunbroker.com/Support/Sup...asp?faqid=1156

[ithinkimamedic]

Waiting until the last min and changing the positive feedback to a negative is dishonorable move at best. YMMV but I'm calling it like I see it.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

Originally Posted by GunLawyer001

You do personally attack anyone who disagrees with your rage-filled screeds, and you fail to even read their arguments as you fly off the handle.

http://forum.pafoa.org/ranges-18/56535-wicens-farm.html (Wicen's Farm)

http://forum.pafoa.org/ammunition-re...scarce-jc.html (Is brass really that scarce? JC!)

http://forum.pafoa.org/pistols-41/46...ter-brand.html (Of these choices, which is the better brand?)

[QuakertownRich]

I attempted to resolve issue with the seller. He sent lies about postal inspector then accused me of lying about the shortage altogether and is not going to correct situation. He charged me for insurance that obviously never was put on. Lied about combining charge for shipping and I end up short on product I paid for.
Some of you may prefer to be a doormat in this situation, I don't. Since my first response to being lied to and robbed is not doable, I let everyone else know his story without risking my rep that does not deserve to be trashed because of his thievery. Don't like it? TS. I got somthing for you to quack on, ithink.
This stance xaction isn't complete until buyer leaves the seller feedback is bunk. In your "brickfront store" dealings, does the seller wait to give you your change until a few days have passed without bad rumor of the sale circulates? These stories of "sometimes a buyer will blah blah blah". So, you're saying it's right to blackmail 99.99999% of buyers because .0001% of buyers do irrational things.
Gun_lawyer, you came onto this thread, without me saying anything about you, saying I'm dishonorable, I am blindsiding, sneaky, and I don't play by the rules. See post#21. Don't get your skirt up in a bind ripping into me when I respond without a bow to you, implying you are just "disagreeing" with me. Must be lawyer talk, but sounds insulting to me.

PS: Lawyers are also thieves like the seller, they steal your money by using the rules against you. Laws written by lawyers who twist it for their financial gain. Yeah, I've been sued.
Did you say something about "sense of who I am" ? Dude, your a lawyer basically saying I am not being scrupulous. Serious? Talk about hypocracy. Isn't there a recent widow out there you can sue for a quick settlement and take your 40% ? Afterall, it was her dead husbands head who caused that damage to your clients baseball bat.

[YBNORMAL]

not to sound like a @$%# but all online transactions are a calculated risk, sorry about your luck, welcome to life..........

your friendly neighborhood dormat.....