|
Readers of the Hall speak and the first Associate Member is inducted!
Amazingly, in this day of political correctness and worship at the altar of The Customer Is ALWAYS Right, favorable comments about the Hall outnumber negative comments about 10 to one, here are a few which represent the general tenor -
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA You really just made my night. I'm searching for Care Bears collectibles and ran across your site. Before I even started looking, I read your "Hall of Fame." Riotous - I have never read anything so funny in my life. Thanks for the laugh!
I love your hall of fame. I had a list of pet peeves on my "me" page for awhile but took it down because of some negative comments. Thanks for the great laugh this morning.
Just had to say that your hall of fame should be required reading for all bidders. Entertaining and educational.
Thanks for taking the time to put your "Hall of Fame" online. I found it hysterical!
I read all of your caveats last night, and enjoyed those ebay "bloopers" you described. I taught school for thirty years, so nothing surprises me any more. You should read the message boards on AOL! Ignorance, venom and illiteracy abound...
I just wanted to say that your Hall of Fame page is the most hilarious thing I have read in a very long time. I am a seller on eBay and have wanted to say some of the very things you have said to people who think you "owe" them something. Thank you for the wonderful laugh. Stupid people are truly funny!
Thank you for the humorous and entertaining page. YES, WE ARE NOT ALONE! I applaud you for not letting them get away with it. Sellers are so afraid when bidders make threats, that they just back away and let them walk all over them for fear of retaliation. Thanks again for putting into words all I wish I could say! You said it best!
Oh my God, I just read your comments and they have to be about the funniest things I have ever read. I had to read it all, it was just soooo funny. As a seller on ebay I know what you mean and the trouble we have. It's great to see it in writing. It's amazing how many idiots there are in this world. I just had to tell you, I love it...
Well I have to say, it's about time someone spells out the utterly obvious to the completely clueless. Only another seller can understand the wretched pinheads of society we meet, and wish we didn't have to deal with at all. We found your site to be a real rib tickler, and interesting enough to add to our bookmarks, so we could come back to see the next public idiot. We thank you for that. Keep dishing it out!
Well, glorified greetings from Down Under. I have just read, with much hilarity, your Clueless Bidder Hall of Fame. You are truly a gem and manage to put into words, so eloquently I might add, all the things I wish to say/write to all my time wasters/non-payers/revenge raters etc.
While I confess to not possessing your expertise in response, you have given me great hope. I have taken the liberty of adding your Hall to my "favorites" so that I may bestow some of your words of wisdom, as I am anticipating some non-payer/revenge rating. Keep up the good work!
As both a seller & buyer I read every line of every ad I'm interested in as it saves so much grief. I also read the About Me and naturally I read yours AND your Clueless Hall of Fame. I took a few minutes but was worth every second.
I also agree, unrelenting stupidity should not go unrecognized. I'm not in the power seller catagory but eBay lets way too many bottom feeders into the community pool. In your entire Clueless dissertation I never detected a mean-spiritedness, just a clear focus of the facts and the further away the other party gets from the facts, the larger the target on their back gets. Please, for all sellers, don't cut the registered jackasses any slack.
This isn't a question about your item. Rather it's a congratulatory email on your listing, terms and conditions, Hall of Shame, etc. I must say that it is the BEST I've ever seen. I'm glad you give permission out to use your words and format. If I ever (highly doubtful) become a seller, you'd be the one I'd come to for advice.
I simply HAD to read it all, it made me laugh and I fully agree with everything you state on your "About-Me"-page and in your comments to and about the Hall of Fame members and associates!
I live in Germany and do most of my transactions here, but I have had the pleasure of dealing with many buyers and sellers from all over the world, too. A while ago, for almost 2 months I did not put any itmes up for auction, because I was really fed up about how some buyers thought they can deal with me.
Until now I have lacked the courage of confronting these people properly with their actions, but I think now I will be less patient with them. I have also put up my own "About-Me"-page which I did not have before, and I must say since I've done that, I've had less problems with that kind of people.
I just wanted to comment on your website about some of your most memorable bidders. I found it very interesting and as a new seller, it gave me some things to think about.
Not everyone is a fast payer and friendly to deal with, as I realized at the beginning of this month when I had a woman win my auction for $1.76 and then complain about the costs of shipping, when it was all clearly stated in the auction, for those who can read. Right!? She constantly threatened to give me a negative feedback.
Thanks for the education into Ebay selling.
Thanks for entertaining fellow sellers with all the gory details of transactions gone awry ... I applaud your efforts at educating the lame!
I figured I wasn't alone, that someone else must have to deal with moronic bidders. I'm very happy to now have evidence of such and a great link to share with my friends who also sell on eBay.
Keep up the great work ... and continued success to you!
I absolutely LOVE your Hall of Clueless Bidders. I sell on Ebay too and I swear the stupidity never stops. My newest one was a lady who won an item and never paid. I relisted and sold the item and THEN she paid through Paypal and demanded her item be sent to her. Never mind the fact that 2 months had passed with no contact from her. I know you have your own pitiful Buyers to hear from, but trust me...you're not alone. I do love your witty responses. You have most certainly made my day reading them.
I am a fairly new seller to eBay, and I just wanted you to know that you are now my #1 IDOL! I LOVE your responses to idiotic feedback, and your "Hall of Fame" has become my new guideline reference. It is refreshing to hear someone respond honestly to others (I am still at that new stage where I feel a need to acquiesce to every unreasonable request in fear of negative feedback). My only wish is that you had an advice page for sellers. Just know that there are sellers out there who appreciate your refreshing and forthright attitude. Thanks!
But, of course, there are always some who just don't get it. The funniest example is this poor guy, who started out by saying -
While shopping at one of your auctions, I looked over your "Clueless Bidder Hall of Fame" page. Personally, I didn't find it funny at all.
Uh, oh, you can tell right off the bat that he is totally devoid of any sense of humor whatsoever.
And, the first hint of his own cluelessness is the redundant "Personally, I."
I think it's childish to make fun of people whose language skills are deficient, and I think your own behavior in all three cases left a great deal to be desired.
Childish?
Somehow, I can't seem to recall any child ever taunting another with "Nyah, nyah, nyah, your spelling is atrocious, your syntax is mangled, and your grammar isn't worthy of a second-grader."
I must not have been around the right children.
Considering the fact that a lack of facility with and understanding of something as basic as the language these people purportedly speak is usually highly predictive of other deficiencies in, oh, for instance, the ability to reason logically or understand legal ramifications, it's not childish, it's part and parcel of the cluelessness of the members of the Hall.
It's also funny as hell.
Now, he could have left it at a couple of reasonably polite sentences, but he seems to be on a mission -
In the first case, the customer's response seems to indicate a belief that you should at the very least have realized the numeral was ambiguous and verified it.
First, there was nothing "ambiguous" about it.
Second, what the clueless might "believe" is neither here nor there.
Third, the statement "if you can't read my writing" doesn't "indicate a belief that you should at the very least have realized the numeral was ambiguous and verified it."
It indicates that the bidder was attempting to evade the cost of her own sloppiness by conjuring up something that never happened, namely that I couldn't read her writing.
You say you explained the situation, but unless you showed her a copy of that particular 3, she would almost certainly have been thinking in terms of what her 3's [sic] normally look like. Can you really blame a person for being hard to convince that a 3 looked so much like a 5 that there was not even any reason to verify it?
My God, he's a mind-reader to boot!
He knows that she was "almost certainly" thinking in terms of what her "3" normally looks like.
Hmmm, let's see, what might one of her "3"s normally look like?
Boy, that's a tough one.
Hey, I'll bet that it might look exactly like a "5"!
Just a wild guess.
And, yes, actually I could and did blame her for being not only an idiot, but for possessing some of the worst penmanship known to man.
Further, it's not my job to waste even more time trying to convince a dolt, who thinks I wouldn't inquire about an unclear address, of anything.
Let's review her many statements about what she was really trying to accomplish -
"I'm not sending any more money"
And, finally, her flat-out admission of that fact that she was trying to evade any cost regardless of her fault, just in case I had missed it -
"I just wanted my money back"
Apparently, this guy can't comprehend her plain English any better than she could mine.
Does anyone detect a pattern here?
And if she thought you were careless in not paying enough attention to notice that it wasn't really a five, why should she be willing to pay for your mistake?
What the clueless might mistakenly "think" isn't the issue, neither is what the clueless are "willing" to do.
Which, of course, begs the question of whether or not the clueless think at all.
Further, from what I can tell, she kept her tone essentially polite. Even the "threat" to leave negative feedback was worded in terms of a desire not to have to take a negative action rather than being worded explicitly as a threat. As best I can tell, nothing in her tone even began to justify the kind of clear, explicit personal attack you responded with.
Ah ha!
Now I get it, it's OK to make unreasonable demands if your "tone" while making them is "essentially polite"!
For anyone who isn't aware of it, by definition, (on eBay's site, anyone can look it up, and, yeah, I know, this was a Yahoo! auction), a feedback threat is made when someone demands that you do something which you are not obligated to do, with the "penalty" for not doing it being negative feedback.
A feedback threat can get you suspended or tossed by most auction venues, and, if someone is stupid enough to threaten me, regardless of the "tone", they get what they deserve, particularly when they're wasting time arguing about a two dollar item.
Worse, by opening with an ad hominem attack, you took the focus away from the real meat of your case: the fact that you're careful enough that such problems had not come up before in over 9000 packages in five years. Look at which part of your message she responded to. Is the way you presented your case really an adult form of communication, or was she right to call your attacks childish?
He really is hung up on this "childish" thing, isn't he?
Too bad that I was long past the point where I was going to spend even one more second trying to convince someone who would lose a debate to a fence post of anything.
Also, by my count, your claim that she got cut off at a 255-character limit is just plain wrong (assuming your quote is accurate). It looks to me like she just forgot the period in her last sentence.
I wonder if he used all of his fingers and toes, or just some of them, because not only is this guy completely humorless, he can't count.
And, what is this "assuming your quote is accurate" garbage?
He, or anyone else who cares to can go and read it, it's still there.
It looks to me like these two were made for each other, because his perceptions are at least as completely off-the-wall as hers are.
Now, having apparently exhausted the possibilities of diverting attention from the stupidity and sloppiness of the first inductee, he moves on to inductee number two and once again demonstrates his finely-honed ability to completely miss the point -
In the second case, it looks to me like what the customer wanted to do was to compensate you for your actual losses due to the mistake.
What the bidder "wanted to do" was evade full responsibility for her actions by making up her own rules after the fact.
His rose-colored glasses are still firmly in place, in fact, it's beginning to sound like they have been permanently installed by a professional.
You, on the other hand, picked an almost completely arbitrary figure with no basis at all in your actual costs. (Yes, you rationalize it based on shipping costs, but since no shipping costs are actually incurred, shipping costs are irrelevant to what is actual fair compensation for your trouble and additional expenses.)
Completely arbitrary?
Hardly.
I guess he missed that part about what I could have required her to do to satisfy her obligation, and how expensive and time consuming it would have been.
Legally, you might be able to get away with such arbitrariness, but morally, I think this is a classic case of "two wrongs don't make a right." (On the other hand, I would consider it entirely appropriate for you to make the point that the time you have to spend running a new auction is worth something in analyzing what is fair.)
Might be able?
Fact.
Two wrongs?
Sorry, only one.
But, gee, by all means, you go right ahead and toss out your favorite totally inapplicable old cliche and play the moralist, oh generous giver of wisdom and arbiter of all that is ethical.
Of course, despite his omnipotence, he somehow has no clue that the "time spent running a new auction" in totally inconsequential, or that the amount of time which can be wasted dealing with nitwits who refuse to follow rules is significant.
Further, your claim that her sending $3.67 constituted agreement to pay $10.00 is absolutely ludicrous.
He's obviously not an attorney, but nonetheless insists on playing one via e-mail by proffering his uninformed opinion, even though he doesn't have even the foggiest notion of what constitutes a binding offer and acceptance.
And, I guess he missed the part about how tossing her legal error into the mix was unimportant, but might be interesting as a troll, which it was.
From the perspective of someone who presumably hadn't thought about the transaction charges involved, it made perfect sense to go ahead and pay what she felt was fair even while the remaining amount was in dispute. Reading anything more into it than that was not logical.
Another stunning revelation!
This is even better than mind-reading!
If you "feel" something makes "perfect sense" and is "fair" it's A-OK!
By golly, there we have it, nothing ever trumps anything which anyone "feels" is "fair" and you can never impair your rights by an imprudent action like, oh, for instance, making a partial payment without conditions or a prior agreement.
Hallelujah! Forget rules, agreements, contract law, close the civil courts, we don't need 'em anymore!
But, his ridiculous legal theory aside, is there anything funnier than someone biting on a troll AFTER they have been told point-blank it was a troll?
This guy is a real piece of work.
But, his mission is incomplete, and although having just done a stunningly poor job of excusing the conduct of inductee number two, he is undaunted, and turns the full force of his righteous fury on me with regard to inductee number three -
In [sic] regard to the third case, your flat-out refusal to return the mistaken money order until you got the correct one does indeed have the appearance of holding the original money order hostage.
I seem to remember something or other about people who demand that you do something because they made a mistake.
But, what is it with this whole "hostage" idea?
And, incidentally, how would you hold a "canceled" money order "hostage"?
I didn't believe it was "canceled" for a second, and whether it was or wasn't had absolutely no bearing on my non-existent obligation to do anything with it.
But, since this guy seems to believe everything else anyone on the other side of these transactions says, why wouldn't he also believe it was "canceled"?
Where do these people come up with this stuff?
Your attitude reeked of someone who feels obligated only to do what the law makes her do rather than feeling obligated to do what is right.
Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, is he?
What is "right" is that the party who caused the problem bears the burden of correcting it, not the other way around, legally, morally, or on any basis on which you care to evaluate it.
Which, almost by definition, makes you less than entirely trustworthy.
Yeah, right, ignoring a useless piece of paper, no, wait, I forgot, holding it "hostage", makes me untrustworthy.
As he again reveals himself to be a fool, off on this weird "hostage" theory of rationalization and conspiracy.
If you're willing to hang onto a money order that was sent to you by mistake when you know the sender wants it back, what else might you be willing to do that your customers wouldn't appreciate?
Gosh, I don't know, he'd have to tell me, but first I'd insist that he take off his tin-foil hat and put down his bong.
And again he ignores what should be a crucial point to him, that part about the precious money order being "canceled", after all, the bidder said it was, so it must be true, right?
In addition to his numerous other problems, he seems to have a severe and recurrent reading comprehension problem, because entire sentences and paragraphs appear to have either never entered his consciousness or disappeared into a very large memory hole.
Maybe he's narcoleptic and just thinks he read this stuff because he was staring at his monitor when he woke up.
Or maybe he's just not very bright.
And when you claimed you had no real obligation to return the erroneous money order at all, you gave them a truly excellent reason to insist that they get it back before they sent the other one, while you still had a stake in returning it! Granted, a certain amount of paranoia had to be involved, but your actions were to paranoia what blood is to a bunch of sharks!
Claimed?
Not a claim, a statement of fact.
Excellent reason?
Only to children, dumb animals, the paranoid and those completely devoid of any understanding of legal matters.
A stake in returning it?
I never had any stake whatsoever in doing anything with what was just another worthless scrap of paper, and this guy is at least as clueless as the scatterbrain who sent it to me.
What blood is to a bunch of sharks?
Well, he may be witless, but at least he's consistently witless, as every reference I made to smelling a potential Hall member, or seeing what sort of ridiculous response might be gotten, or seeing what a deficient mind can cough up when prodded, "comic value", or replying "with gusto" went flying right over his apparently very empty head.
One of my Bible teachers in school had a saying that when you point a finger at someone, you have three more pointing right back at yourself. I think your "Hall of Fame" is a classic example of that.
And he has the temerity to call me "childish"?
Guffaw.
I think it must be abundantly obvious to virtually everyone at this point why I couldn't resist the temptation to dissect this drivel, particularly in view of its sheer voluminousness.
As they say, it's an extremely target-rich environment.
But, alas, his lengthy exercise in flogging his vapid theories and defending the insipid is almost at an end, as there is but one last paragraph -
It shows some major mistakes on the part of certain customers, but it shows a lot of errors in your own handling of the situations as well. You obviously have a good vocabulary and good writing skills, and there are better things you could do with them than use them to hurl a higher class of insults at people who offend you.
Blind squirrel finds nut!
He's absolutely right about one thing.
There were a lot of errors in my handling of the situations.
I was far too patient and wasted entirely too much time trying to explain extremely simple stuff to what turned out to be a bunch of unreasoning cretins.
Of course, he immediately ruins his unintended moment of glory by becoming the self-appointed time-use-police.
At least he recognizes quality insults when he sees 'em.
Now, wake up, dude, here's a news flash.
Thank you very much, but I'll do whatsoever I please with any time and talent I may have, regardless of what the busybodies of the world may think.
As long as the 1% keep doing incredibly stupid things, and I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting for them to stop, and, as long as I find it amusing, I'll document the idiocy, some would even say mendacity, of those rare people who refuse to stop furiously digging the large holes they put themselves in.
And, of course, I couldn't possibly leave out anyone who would go to insane lengths to try to explain away the grossly irresponsible and/or ridiculous behavior of people he doesn't even know, providing highly fertile comic ground to till in the process.
So, in honor of his totally and abjectly failed effort to defend the indefensible, I hereby confer on this severely logic-challenged, stick-in-the-mud, sanctimonious faux-moralist and putative nanny-wannabe the status of
Ra!
Perhaps one day he'll put together the money to get the funny bone implant he so obviously and desperately needs.
Unfortunately, there are no financial emoluments attendant to membership or associate membership in the Hall, so I can't help him out with that.
And, although I did get an offer for inductees from Nitwits, Numbskulls and Nincompoops Anonymous for passes for 10 free meetings, I think he's probably too far gone for it to help.
Maybe someone will volunteer to teach him how to count to 255 without using any fingers or toes.
Update - The third Associate Member is inducted!
[The induction of Associate Member number three has been placed here because like Associate Member number one above, it was based on comment by a Hall reader, Associate Member number two is below.]
Perhaps inspired by the first Associate Member, we have these two hilarious e-mails from another busybody, know-it-all, do-gooder defender of the indefensible, who absolutely cannot restrain her impulse to try to "fix" me and no doubt all else that's wrong with the world in her abysmally clueless opinion.
It appears that she views the entire Hall narrative as some sort of personal attack, at least subconsciously, as she admits both to mailing a payment to the wrong person and to making an incorrect bid.
Not to mention that she can't tell a "3" from a "5".
It's also obvious that she failed to note that only a very pitiful few manage to make it into the Hall, and seems to think that I'm some sort of horrible monster who must be brought to heel.
Other than that, I have no idea what would cause anyone to rant on for over 1,000 words to somebody they don't know about something which is none of their business.
At least the results of their compulsions are funny.
Besides, I get so few critical comments that it's hard to maintain any balance, so here she is in her ridiculous entirety -
I just wanted to comment on your "About Me" page. The woman who caused you to create your Hall of Fame should have been given the benefit of the doubt. The first look I had at her envelope, I could see it was a "3" not a "5".
Amazing how people see exactly what they want to see, isn't it?
But regardless, if it got returned because you made a mistake on her address, then it's your responsibility as a seller to mail it again.
Uh, huh, sure it is.
Regardless?
No sane person would maintain such a fiction.
It was not her fault that you misread her address.
Actually, I read it correctly, but if one insists on using the "misread" formulation, then it's her fault for not providing an address which couldn't be misread.
But, I belabor the obvious.
Also, as a seller, you should always get their address from either an e-mail or have them write it in the letter they mail to you.
"Or have them write it in the letter."
OK.
Let's consider for a moment the large number of bidders who seem to have trouble reading ANY part of a listing.
The significant number of envelopes which arrive with NO CLUE WHATSOEVER about what is being paid for.
The fact that perhaps half of all payment envelopes have ONLY a return address.
Yeah, sure, you bet, I'm absolutely certain they'll all pay very close attention to that idea.
And, I think I'll start e-mailing for addresses.
After all, this problem has cropped up exactly once in over 13,000 [at the time this was written] sales, so obviously it's best to waste hundreds and hundreds of hours to prevent it from ever happening again.
Being a seller of so many transactions, you should know that you shouldn't rely on a return address on an envelope as the address. You always have it ahead of time to be sure it's right. Also, many times, it could be someone else mailing the payment for the winner, but if you go by return addresses, obviously you would end up mailing it to the wrong person. I'm just trying to give my opinion as an outsider looking at the situation!
Gosh, it's always such a pleasure to read the blathering of someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.
Oh, and believe it or not, people actually write notes, and put these little notes in their envelopes when they want something shipped to an address other than the return address.
I know, shocking, but true.
I really don't think it was all that necessary to embaress [sic] the bidder like that over something that wasn't even her fault [sic]. And you claim she had no feedback yet? If that's correct, then you should know that she is apparently new to ebay and doesn't know how it works yet, ie. the rules on refunds or situations such as hers.
I claim?
If that's correct?
[Cue Twilight Zone theme]
I'm surprised this lunatic doesn't claim that this entire Hall is a fabrication.
New or not, somehow or another everyone else has managed to write legibly enough to convey what they intended to convey.
And the bidder's responsibility for her own writing has got nothing to do with any rule.
Well anyway, I just felt the need to voice my opinion. Being a seller and a bidder myself for almost 5 years,
A little truth in advertising regarding selling.
As of this writing, she currently has no items for sale.
She has no feedback comments in which she is identifiable as the seller.
I guess winning one item about every two weeks makes you an authority.
Please excuse me while I bow down to such impressive selling experience.
I've seen many a bad situations [sic] , but honestly, if I ever read an address wrong and got the package returned to me, I would feel it was my responsibility to send it again. I read the # wrong, so it's not fair to expect the bidder to send more $$ for shipping or just offer them a refund for what they paid less the shipping charge, when in reality, they had absolutely nothing at all whatsoever [sic] to do with what happened with their package.
Anybody got the name and number of a good optometrist or opthalmologist?
Perhaps one with a wall chart which uses "3" or "5" instead of "E".
I just think you should be a bit more fair next time.
Well, if I ever make a mistake reading an address, I'll do that.
Everyone else is free to pay for the mistakes of others if they wish to.
Put yourself in their shoes.
No, thanks.
If you won an item, and the seller read your address wrong, would it be fair for them to expect you to send more money because it got returned to them? No, it wouldn't. And I think if that had happened to you, you would have been just as aggrevated [sic] and probably wrote [sic] just as much as you did about her situation because you would feel that it was not your fault someone read your address wrong and that they were trying to scam more money out of you, and so on and so forth. I always look at it that way, and also, try to treat others the way you would want them to treat you. And with that said, just remember...always reverse the situation, and think how you would feel if it were done to you, and how you would want the situation handled.
Good grief, what can you say about someone who obviously can't comprehend the facts, and then rambles on endlessly about a figment of their imagination?
And why must all of these holier-than-thou do-gooders always sound like they're talking to infants?
Must be something in the water.
But, all of that ranting simply wasn't enough.
This second outburst, while broken up by my commentary, actually was all a single, huge, unreadable paragraph -
I'm sorry. This is my last e-mail. I don't mean to be a bother, but again, as an outsider looking at this situation, I feel the need to voice my opinion once more.
Stop me before I write again!
These people just kill me.
"I don't mean to be a bother," but I'm going to proceed to be exactly that.
"I feel the need to voice my (idiotic) opinion," which matters to absolutely no one else, about things which are none of my business.
Ad nauseum.
The woman from Yahoo who sent you the wrong money order by mistake and sent yours to someone else...a case of honest mistake that anyone can do when mailing several payments at one time.
Let's see, it's happened twice in many thousands of mailed payments.
The sender of the other mistake wasn't a paranoid whack-job and isn't in the Hall.
I myself [sic] have done it once before.
Ooops, there's that annoying busybody tendency to be redundant again.
And, more tellingly, there's what's probably at the root of the compulsion to defend these rarest of that rare bird, the completely and totally clueless bidder.
The seller immediately mailed it back to me since it was not made out to her, and I just sent her another payment. It's really not necessary to have kept her money order and cause all that fighting. When you realized it was not your money order, you should have returned it to her.
Fighting?
Gee, I must have missed something.
I was attempting to explain simple stuff to someone who demanded that I do something because she made a mistake.
It was hilarious.
How other people deal with paranoid delusionals is up to them.
There was no reason to want to hold onto it until she sent another payment.
Hmmm, do I detect shades of that goofy ransom argument?
Is it possible that all nitwits have identical haywired neural pathways?
Maybe it really is genetic
Cluelessopithicus!
Quick, someone call an archeologist.
She was right when saying, if you happened to get someone elses [sic] mail, you would obviously send it back.
Actually, no, I wouldn't "obviously send it back", the USPS would be responsible for the refused, unopened letter.
But, never let a mixed up analogy get in the way of making a specious argument.
It's not like the woman had no intentions of paying you. It was an honest mistake of mixed up money orders. I also agree with her when she said she read your About Me page, about how you come off to others. Honestly, reading the situations that occurred, I would defintely [sic] say you were in the wrong. The way you talk down to people and belittle them is quite rude.
This woman, like all others of her ilk, has absolutely no sense of humor.
In addition to possessing the uncanny ability to completely miss the crux of every important issue.
They seem to go together.
And, way, way, way over her head is the concept that anyone would actually carefully word anything in a manner that might tend to drive the problematic 1% away.
You really should learn to handle situations with kindness and understanding. Honestly, what I see as the cause for problems here is the fact that you feel you are always right, and everyone else is always wrong. You need to stop reacting the way you do by treating people like they are complete idiots.
Except for the fact that complete idiots IS an accurate description of the members of the Hall.
This poor scold apparently can't grasp the fact that Hall members are unique and completely unlike the other 99.97% of those in my universe of bidders.
Of the 99.97%, approximately 99.5% leave positive feedback.
The rest are mainly deadbeats.
And the writer apparently is a doormat who enjoys being walked on by anyone and everyone who makes an unjustified demand.
If you look at the big picture, as I am, being uninvolved in this, you would see that the bidders are just trying to work out messed up situations, and you come at them with your degrading words and inability to see that they might actually be telling you the truth.
Or not.
It's always amazing to see the lengths some people will go to to defend proven liars.
Of course, her affinity for other idiots who have done the same stupid things which she has done puts the lie to the claim of being "uninvolved", at least psychologically.
And, when one caused the mess but doesn't want to pay for it, it isn't "just trying to work out messed up situations", it's called trying to evade responsibility.
Like the woman who said she bid $100 by mistake, and meant to only bid $10. You come off saying, oh so now she says maybe she bid and maybe she didn't...the woman never once said she didn't bid. I read her statement twice.
Well, if twice isn't enough, try reading it again.
The words "I did NOT bid $100" are pretty clear and might even be enlightening.
The question was never whether she bid at all, it was always whether she bid $100 and what the cost of her mistake would be, and my description of the bidder's actions and words was accurate.
Five bonus points for trying to twist the unambiguous.
But regardless, she mistakenly bid the wrong amount, it happens. I've done it.
I guess rationalization is to be expected from someone who relates so well to those who can't be bothered to pay attention to how much they're bidding, or failing that, to pay attention to bid notices from the venue.
Yes, it would have been better if she realized it and canceled her bid, but she didn't.
What an amazing insight.
Now, we return you to your regularly scheduled flogging of me.
It's a mistake that does happen. You could have just let it go and offered the item to the 2nd highest bidder. Instead, you belittled the woman and basically called her a liar.
Sorry, I'm neither an idiot nor a doormat, and the bidder made a liar out of herself after whining about being driven away from eBay.
But, I am a good belittler of those who roundly deserve it.
You didn't even want to hear her explanation. You just automatically feel that people should do things the way you want them done. God forbid anyone makes a mistake. You immediately react as if they were the most stupid person in the world. Basically as I see it, you come off as very rude and judgemental, and you can't see past the end of your nose.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black.
Except that I hold people to account for their actions, and the writer is in the business of excusing them, albeit poorly.
I'm saying this as advice from one seller [sic] to another. I've had to deal with people like you before. I'm an honest person, but when confronted with people like you, it's a nightmare to get through.
Actually it's people like the members of the Hall who think the world owes them something and their equally witless defenders who are the nightmare.
These busybodies seem to have no end of free, poorly drawn conclusions and silly advice, but Heaven forfend that anyone else be the least bit judgemental.
They really need to get over it, because the three bidders out of each 10,000 who don't deserve a pass will never get one from me.
But again, I just think you really need to put yourself in their shoes.
Once again, no, I have no desire to experience cluelessness, but thanks anyway.
It is possible to make mistakes ya know, we are only human. You need to understand that mistakes are mistakes, regardless of how big or small,or who makes them...you can't accuse thiers [sic] of being stupid. You make mistakes don't you? Are you stupid and illiterate just because you make them? No, you're not. So please stop treating people like they are morons, and start treating them like people...treat them the way you would want them to treat you in the exact kind of situation.
How many times can one person completely miss the point that these people are both stupid AND illiterate?
More importantly, how many times can one person completely miss the point that these people all tried to avoid responsibility for their own mistakes?
I treated them exactly the way I would expect to be treated if I had acted as they did.
Plus it's fun to poke and jab them a little just to see what inanity they will concoct next.
I'm sorry if I bothered you. I just felt very strongly about your page, and I felt the need to tell you what I thought of it.
Yeah, we can tell.
Some people like to embarrass themselves.
Some like to do it in writing.
Some are even dumb enough to do it when similar comments have been thoroughly shredded and exposed as utter tripe and then publicly posted on my web site.
I hope you are open enough to at least think about things I've said. I'm sure future problems won't get so out of hand if you start reacting and handling them differently.
Busybodies of the world, unite!
We're gonna fix these sellers!
We don't know what we're talking about, but we're going to press mindlessly onward!
The rantings of all past and any future busybodies notwithstanding, future problems caused by potential Hall members will continue to be handled as always.
And chronicled here if they're funny enough and I care to bother.
But, she hasn't completely wasted her time, she's unwittingly provided a few more laughs and has become the latest Associate Member of the Hall -
The second Associate Member is inducted!
Some people manage to miss virtually everything.
This one certainly did.
First, the eBay auction listing as it appeared -
And, my "About Me" page, incorporated into every auction by reference, as it read at the time of the Koosas auction -
You've now seen everything that the bidder had available to her.
She apparently chose to ignore all of it, first evidenced by this e-mail -
I won your cat Koosa [sic], Please e-mail me your mailing address, so I can get payment on it's [sic] way.
Which got the usual response -
Please read the listing/description, all payment/shipping info is there
Which solved her non-existent address problem, but she nonetheless managed to miss the part about there being no need to inform me about making payment -
will send 11.00 out, Friday November 8, 2002....Do you have any more Koosas for sale with collars, please let me know
Right, I'll run right on over to my giant Koosas warehouse and count my Koosas collars.
Over the last six years, I've purchased a loose Koosas perhaps a dozen times, and this one was the only one which still had the collar, and will probably be the only collar I'll see if I continue buying them for the next 20 years.
The woman must live someplace where no children play with CPK items.
I had a good chuckle and ignored the silly question.
A few days later, she emits this e-mail -
I was just wondering if you have recieved [sic] payment of 11.00 yet. I sent it out Friday Morning [sic], Please let me know when you mail "Sugar" out
Which also got the usual response -
Please read my "About Me" page, it contains shipping schedule information
Let's see, so far, she has managed to miss my address in the listing, the fact that she needn't tell me about making payment, the fact that I ship goods the next business day after receipt of payment, and the fact that no status inquiries should be made until sufficient time for routine delivery has passed.
I should have figured that all would not be well.
A few days later, with no complaint, no request to return for refund, in fact, no further communication of any kind, she leaves this feedback -
Complaint : Cat, [sic] was dirty, and had marker [sic] on its face, charged wrong shipping as well!!!!!
This twit couldn't possibly have actually read the listing, which contained the words "MARK on cheek, 10% nose RUB, MARKS on feet & tail, good condition."
Not to mention the fact that the picture should make it crystal clear, even to a total idiot, that the item wasn't in pristine condition.
Or the fact that "good" is the 3rd lowest possible rating on my condition scale.
And, of course, I charged precisely the amount detailed in the listing: "The shipping/handling charge which must be ADDED to the winning bid amount for USA destinations is $6.00 for Priority."
But this nitwit apparently doesn't understand that "shipping/handling" doesn't mean the amount that the USPS charges.
Unfortunately, eBay feedback is limited to 80 characters, so this had to suffice -
Response by rusty33150 - Try reading next time, item was FULLY described, shipping/HANDLING was specified
And, of course, when an idiot leaves unjustified feedback, there is a price to be paid -
Complaint : Can't be bothered to read the clear listing, then leaves an unjustified negative
Which elicited this hopeless response -
Response by carebear1881 - TOOK SEVERAL DAYS FOR THIS PERSON TO CONTACT ME, WAS UNCLEAR ON EVERYTHING!!!!!
Hey, when cornered by facts, just make stuff up and lie about everything!
Start with the most elementary fact, namely that she unnecessarily contacted me after failing to read the listing, and that there was never any reason why I would have contacted her, as explained on the "Me" page.
Continue with something completely delusional like "UNCLEAR ON EVERYTHING!!!!!"
Which does, however, perfectly encapsulate the results of her utterly ineffectual thought processes.
What planet is she on?
I have never seen any seller on eBay or elsewhere who is more clear, more detailed, or more specific than I am.
I point out every flaw, I put all references to flaws in upper-case letters to draw attention to them, and I never, ever engage in any puffery about how "cute" or "adorable" an item is.
The proof of this is in my feedback pudding, and anyone who reads all of it will notice how frequently buyers note that the item was in better condition than was expected.
My terms cover almost every possible contingency short of nuclear war.
Of course, all of that does absolutely no good whatsoever when someone refuses to read, and, as apparently happened in this case, look at the picture.
So, in honor of the sheer ridiculousness of this bidder's antics, I hereby confer on this nut-ball the status of -
And now a few words for anyone who might actually think that I am the least bit worried about 37 cents of postage.
Or any other minor item that becomes the focus of or any part of the hilarious exchanges with the numbskulls who have been enshrined in the Hall.
I pay every fee in the book, to the tune of hundreds of dollars each month, from listing and final sale fees on auction venues, to fees on all incoming electronic payments, to site hosting fees for the space I use to list items for sale and to serve pictures in listings on auction venues.
Not to mention credit card chargebacks.
On top of which, I get abused for nickles and dimes and quarters virtually every day by people who apparently are incapable of adding two or three or four numbers accurately.
Do I hold up a transaction because of a small error?
Never, I eat it, it's not worth the time or effort.
Do I tolerate morons who think they're entitled to something when they're the cause of a problem?
Never, I point out the hole they're in, and I only pursue it if they refuse to stop digging.
The perceptive reader of the Clueless will have noticed a pattern -
None of which was any particular problem until each of them proceeded to whine and/or make excuses and/or demand something of me.
That is the point in the process of dealing with what would normally be routine matters where I take issue with dolts purely on principle, the principle usually being that you are responsible for your own actions and consequently you are not going to impose any term on me or force me to pay any resultant cost.
If, in the process of pointing out what the facts or realities of the situation are, the party persists in whining or making excuses or demands, it can then also become a matter of no small amusement in addition to upholding the principle involved, and at that point I will spare no effort to tweak the miscreant until he or she "gets" it.
Am I "bitter" about any of this, as paranoid crack-pot inductee number three put it?
Nope, not in the least, it goes with the territory, has for many years, and, human nature being what it is, it always will.
Do I think somebody, somewhere, sometimes needs to set a few of these whining, inconsiderate, self-indulgent, self-righteous, delusional, uneducated morons and twerps back a step or two because most people put up with their garbage and thus only confirm and encourage their lousy behavior?
Guilty
The sole compensation for doing what most won't is having the opportunity to put the drivel which results from tweaking idiots who deserve it out there for the world to see.
It can be extremely funny, as anybody with any sense of humor who has read the trevails of the Hall inductees can readily see.
For your further amusement, here is what will no doubt be a completely futile effort.
I say that because this section is directed at, and is an attempt to educate some of the blathering busybodies, know-nothing know-it-alls and mendacious meddlers who are unable to resist the temptation to start or contribute to ridiculous on-line discussions about my listings and/or my "Me" page and/or this Hall of Fame on various auction fora and other boards.
I added this little section because some of these dolts actually read this Hall before making their whacky comments.
One of their favorite misguided, conclusion-jumping rants revolves around the fact that my eBay feedback is about 3,000 and I have made 13,000 sales [all numbers quoted are as of the time this section was written].
So, obviously "hardly anyone", as someone put it, leaves me good feedback.
Oh, the horror!
I know it's terribly unsporting to introduce something completely foreign to their muddled minds, but I'll toss in a few facts anyway.
The cumulative total number of sales I've made, now over 13,300, is a combination of:
1) regular sales from this site and locally since 1997,
2) auction sales from this site starting in 1998 and ending in 2001, and
3) auction sales on sites such as eBay and Yahoo!, primarily since 2001
Cumulative eBay and Yahoo! sales are about 48% of total cumulative sales.
What's that?
eBay and Yahoo! are only 48%?
Imagine that!
Someone might actually sell something somewhere other than eBay!
Shocking, but true.
That 48% is about 6,400 sales.
As of this writing, I have about 5,700 total positive feedback comments between eBay and Yahoo! (which includes repeat winners/sales).
OK, whiners, do the math.
Oops, sorry, I forgot that you're the same clueless people who have trouble adding two numbers together to get your total, so how could I possibly expect you to do simple math?
The answer is that almost 90% of my auction winners leave feedback.
Yup, that certainly proves that "hardly anyone" leaves me feedback.
Obviously, I'm an ogre, and my winners are all petrified by me and too scared to leave feedback.
Sorry to disappoint you.
I can only speculate that the other 10% are like me and don't give a flying fig about maximizing feedback, but I must say that even I'm surprised by the 90% number.
Before checking the figures, my guess was that it would be closer to 60%.
Another favorite whipping boy is that "only" 99.3% (at this writing) of my eBay feedback is positive.
Actually, it's amazing that the percentage isn't lower because I leave deadbeats and other miscreants the negatives they deserve.
I suppose I could emulate the many spineless users who won't leave a negative under any circumstances and thus avoid retaliation.
Which is no doubt what most of the anonymous weasels who discuss my auctions do.
Another one of their preferred attacks, and my personal favorite, is that I sell junk.
Of course, what constitutes junk is definitely in the mind of the beholder, and one man's junk is most assuredly another man's treasure.
A fact to which the over one quarter of a million dollars I've received for my "junk" attests mightily.
In case you're curious, the most expensive item sold to date was a $400 piece of "junk".
For the terminally curious, and the blowhards on the boards who think that listing my "junk" ain't worth the time, my total cost on that over one quarter-million dollars worth of "junk" was less than $38,000.
If you're curious because you're with the IRS or the Florida Department of Revenue, be informed that I keep exhaustive, meticulous written records of everything, report every dime of income, pay every tax due, and that your audit time will be more profitably spent elsewhere.
For instance, on some of the mental midgets who think that the moratorium on new internet taxes means that income and sales taxes don't apply to them.
In fact, that sadly mistaken delusion is swallowed whole so widely that some of the geniuses posting on threads about my auctions probably believe it.
In any case, the funny thing is that I always hear about these pitiful discussions (about a half-dozen of them in the last couple of years) from someone, and whoever it is usually also informs the board owner.
And, believe it or not, auction venues and other auction discussion board owners have lawyers.
They pay their lawyers good money.
They also listen to them.
Which means that they don't want to expose themselves to potential liability arising from the libelous rantings of bumbling idiots who couldn't find their posterior with a map and both hands in a lit closet.
So, once aware of them, boards invariably yank the entire thread post haste.
Oh, the terrible waste of misplaced angst, of shrill vituperation, of clownish anxiety, of naked jealosy, of unadulterated cattiness, of downright abject stupidity, it's just too much to bear!
It really is too bad, because sometimes all the hand-wringing and mud slinging by the holier-than-thou, politically correct, customer ass-kissing twits can be quite amusing, particularly when someone who isn't insane calls them on their baloney and is answered by stunned silence.
The slightly puzzled posts by those who just can't quite fathom how it is that I'm a Powerseller cranking out huge volumes of "junk" year in and year out are also amusing.
So, if you happen to be one of the anonymous busybodies from some board who can't wait to get back over there and rip into me for whatever imagined sin, I say sally forth and do it!
Do it now!
Get with it!
Stop wasting time, the board's moderators and lawyers can't wait to make note of whatever moniker you're hiding behind!
Oh, and by the way, private lawyers conducting discovery pursuant to a civil cause of action for tortious interference or libel have amazing court-enforced powers of subpoena.
Which means that someone so disposed can force an ISP, auction venue or bulletin board to divulge your real identity in a matter of hours.
Just thought you should know that while you're having all that fun smugly hiding behind your "anonymous" screen name.
Finally, a few serious words about my listings, which get their own unsolicited and mostly positive comments, but also seem to inspire the know-it-all busybody element out there to spout off every once in a while -
First, my experience has been that, and I say this without fear of contradiction, a significant percentage of auction bidders simply refuse to READ.
I don't mean they refuse to read long, boring recitations of terms, I mean they refuse to read ANYTHING at all.
They look at the picture and bid.
They do this without regard to the paucity or abundance of information in the listing.
Now, my methodology of incorporating everything into the listing and minimizing the need for useless e-mail isn't unique on eBay or Yahoo! or any other venue, but I am part of a distinct minority.
After years of trying to get people to read with varying degrees of success, I tried my slashed-circle word graphics, since the non-readers seem to like to look at pictures.
Sort of a sleight-of-hand to slip some key words into their consciousness.
It works, at least to some degree.
It appears to 1) drive away many who won't read listings, which is just fine with me, as those are the people who cause the bulk of all problems.
And/or 2) convince many who don't normally read a listing carefully to actually do so, which is also a good thing.
Which is sheer conjecture on my part, but the fact is that I get far fewer silly questions, fewer non-payers, and fewer problems in general, since adding the graphics.
So, to the people who think it's simply horrrrrible (or worse) that my graphics say "negative" things like NO NON-READERS, NO CHECKS, etc., get over it and save your electronic breath, 'cause I ain't changin' nuthin'.
Well, I take that back, when eBay got rid of "check-out" I removed the references to it and added some nifty little arrows pointing directly at the shipping/handling cost and the methods by which one can pay.
And, after I added an eBay store, I substituted some store-related graphics.
However, the philosophy behind the graphics will never change.
Of course, any discussion or argument about auction listings is part of a larger issue, namely that on-line sellers are regarded by many as if they were transients selling hot goods out of the back of a truck.
Which is at least partially justified in view of the lousy job some sellers manage to do, from the lack of basic terms of sale, to the lack of any presentation or HTML formatting skill, to the lack of something as elementary as the ability to spell and construct simple sentences properly, never mind outright fraud.
The lack of any serious venue requirements for terms and seller paranoia about putting their name and address in their listings has resulted in the entire unnecessay post-auction e-mail hand-holding routine becoming common practice.
Which encourages a lack of attention and reading by bidders who think it will all get handled when they get that e-mail from the seller after they've won.
Until serious on-line sellers start acting more like real businesses, they'll never break the cycle of sloppy sellers reinforcing inattentive bidders and will continue to waste incredible amounts of time explaining the same simple stuff ad infinitum and ad nauseum.
I realize that it's probably a losing battle, but I'm fighting it anyway, and I hope that more high-volume sellers will do the same, and that everyone else will encourage the various auction venues to demand more of both their buyers and sellers.
Some people absolutely can't resist making fools of themselves.
This guy wasn't a bidder, just a busybody who either failed or never took contract law 101 -
An interesting auction write-up. Looks like you've been burned a few time. Only flaw is in expecting buyers to assume shipping liability or pay insurance. See where you legally stand:
FYI: Liability, legally, comes with possession. While in your possession, you have liability. If you pass to a carrier, they have liability as long as you can prove they took possession (a itemized receipt or the like). The liability chain follows the possession line. The buyer, only assumes liability "a reasonable time" after they assume possession. The property, be it the funds or item, remain the property of the original owner (item/seller, $/buyer) until possession on both sides has been completed. This is after delivery and acceptance by both buyer and seller.
That's the way the law works. Insurance protects the seller/shipper for loss or damage by the carrier. The buyer is not involved until they take possession of the item.
Also, by federal law, all carriers must maintain a min of $100 liability insurance. UPS, Fed Ex, etc are open about this. The USPS is not so open and insurance is their biggest money maker. When you "buy" insurance from the USPS, you actually buy proof of posession. But if you've ever tried to collect, you'll easily blow more than the value of the item shipped in the time and aggrivation [sic] involved in trying to collect from the USPS.
Insurance for items valued over $100 becomes a cost of doing business and hence, it's justified to pass these costs on to the buyer. But it's still the seller/shipper who is buying the insurance for their protection.
The above is strictly For Your Information. It's always nice to know where the liability stands. Most eBayers are confused. It's not unusual for a seller to claim no liability after the item leaves their hands but as you see, they can not legally do that. It's the buyer's liability to get the payment to the seller and the seller's liability to get the item to the buyer.
Now, he's generally right about how liability may and often does work, and about the $100 statutory obligation, and about the USPS.
And, while whoever coined the phrase "you can't fight city hall" didn't have the USPS in mind, they easily could have, as the USPS is different, and I've never found the exemption under which they operate, although I'm sure it's out there, somewhere.
But, of course, being generally right about generalities isn't the point.
The bottom line is that he was blathering on, and on, and on about irrelevancies.
And he stepped right smack-dab in the middle of a giant pile of it with "they can not legally do that."
So, since he was busy dispensing legal advice without a license, I figured it was worth a response -
>FYI: Liability, legally, comes with possession.
You're obviously completely unfamiliar with Section 2-509 paragraph (4) of the Uniform Commercial Code, adopted by all 50 states, which says, in part:
"The provisions of this section are subject to contrary agreement of the parties..."
So, as you can see, eBay sellers such as myself who aren't confused and who specifically disclaim shipping risk as a term of every listing, which every bidder agrees to by bidding under the terms of eBay's user agreement, do not have legal liability for shipping loss or damage
Next time, you might try knowing what you're talking about before dispensing completely bogus advice
Apparently, he's not good at legal research -
So you think, a buyer, who has reimbursed you for the cost of insurance, will assume liability? The carrier looses the item so the buyer, who has never ever seen it and doesn't know for sure that you've sent it, has to try to collect? That's ridiculous!
So you think that stating in an auction, that the seller doesn't want to assume any liability after it leaves his/her hands is ratified by a bidder bidding? If it went to court, I surely wouldn't want to be in the seller's shoes.
Buy hey, you can't say I didn't try to warn you. Good luck. For your sake I hope your carrier never looses [sic] or breaks anything.
So, I spelled it out for him in a little more detail -
>So you think that stating in an auction, that the
Since you seem to have some sort of reading comprehension problem, I'll try one more time:
eBay User Agreement paragraph (4):
"By bidding on an item YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE CONDITIONS OF SALE INCLUDED IN THE ITEM'S DESCRIPTION so long as those conditions of sale are not in violation of this Agreement or unlawful."
All of my item decriptions:
"SHIPPING RISK IS YOURS, for INSURANCE for USA desinations add $1.30 per $50 (or fraction of $50) of the winning bid amount"
Section 2-509 [Risk of Loss in the Absence of Breach] paragraph (4) of the Uniform Commercial Code:
"The provisions of this section are subject to CONTRARY AGREEMENT of the parties..."
So, even though you may be incapable of understanding those simple provisions and the consequences that flow from them, most people actually comprehend that by the act of bidding on one of my auctions the bidder does in fact agree to assume all shipping risk, that such assumption of risk is not contrary to any law, and that anyone maintaining otherwise would be laughed out of any court in which they tried to dispute it
Don't believe me?
Ask any lawyer, something which you obviously aren't
>The carrier looses [sic] the item so the buyer (...) has
A buyer who has paid for insurance never files a claim for loss or damage, I file it, as do virtually all sellers
A buyer who tries to collect from a carrier for a lost or damaged item on which the buyer has assumed shipping risk but not purchased insurance is attempting to commit a fraud upon the carrier
I'm done trying to disabuse you of your fantasies, but in the interest of saving you further embarrassment I suggest that you stop playing e-mail attorney until you acquire enough expertise that someone might be comfortable having you represent their dog
And that put an end to his direction of spurious advice to me, but somehow I suspect that he's still out there endlessly spouting his patent nonsense to others.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
