- Joined
- Jan 24, 2001
- Messages
- 915
Here we go... like the subject says, Joe Jurianto (lets call him J. from now on) CAN NOT be trusted. So, pour yourself a pint, sit back, and read. Its long!
<i>Note: numbers scripted as "{x}" are references to e-mails which I'll post at the end.</i>
Let me draw you a timeline of the major events leading up to this post:
Thurs. Nov. 8 - Settle on a deal with J. I ask for his shipping terms, J. suggests shipping together and that he will try to ship today, I agree to his terms.{1}
Friday. Nov 9 - Ship out my Monarch balisong in exchange for his BM450. Notify J. J. acknowledges and says he got busy and will try to ship it tomorrow (Saturday). Fine with me.
Sat. 10 through Tues. 13, - Send multiple e-mails to J. asking if he's shipped the knife yet. No responses, although I did notice him perusing the balisong forums.
Wed. 14 - Get response from J. telling me that he got my package, but there was a problem with his shipping and that he had to resend it. Ok, I have my suspicions here, but I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. He also tells me that he's cut himself with it (I don't think too much of this, but he will try to use this against me later).{2}
Wed. 14, night time - I decide I don't like the smell of things and send an e-mail to J. stating that I am backing out of the trade all-together.
Fri. 16 - Repeat my sentiment to J. in yet another e-mail.{3}
Fri. 16 - J. informs me that he can't trade back because he has already traded the Monarch with somebody else (at this point I do not have his trade knife, yet he has already traded mine away). Also, not only has he manipulated it (somewhat understandable for a balisong nut), but he has also "erased" the printing on it which marked it as a first production run. J. shows no intention of getting the Monarch back because "As much as I want to return it to you, I have to respect my deal with [name of person here]."{4} Well, what happened to the respect for our deal? J. does apologize tersely, but gives no indication of rectifying the situation.
Fri. 16, again - I write back to J. telling him how dissappointed I am at this deal and what he has done. I ask for either the Monarch back (if he can get it back at this point) plus retribution (I asked for half the price I paid, $65) for the damage he's done to it or the full price I paid for the knife ($135). I explain certain etiquette which BF members usually extend to each other, such as waiting until both members are happy with deal before using or trading the knife away as well as shipping both knives at the same time. Again, I explain how I think he fouled up this deal and ask for him to make things right.
Fri. 16, J.'s resonse (this is a good one, see exhibit {4} below) - J. tells me, he thinks <b>HE</b> has been taken advantage of!! Since he tried to apologize in his last e-mail, apparently, he thinks he doesn't owe me anything else. J. disagrees that forum members send the knife together (as per one of my complaints), that he did send it and it got returned (fine, I'll believe him...), and that he never saw it in writing anyway. Please refer to exhibit {1} and the events of Nov. 8 again. His other comments are that he thinks I set him up because I knew that he played with the knife before backing out of the trade. Please refer to exhibit {2} as his proof of my "setting him up". Next J. claims that he is "upset" that I said he fouled this deal up. His proof?...
<i>"In my whole life, I have been succeeding in respecting a business deals (internet) with many people for a much more expensive items. I have done deals about custom knives and antique japanese swords."</i>
That folks, is his irrefutable proof that he did not foul this deal up. The flaw in your argument, J., is that past performance does not always predict future behavior, especially not in this case. He again claims that he's offended by my words because
<i>"It seems to ME that you set me up. You might have waited until I sent you email about my having played with the knives and then decided to cancel the trade."</i>
Yes, he might have me here, you found my trick... I make deals, wait until the other party has "played" with the knife, then cancel and ask for money back... it is a great strategy. This works especially well, WHEN I HAVEN'T EVEN RECEIVED THE KNIFE I WAS SUPPOSED TO GET! Clearly, J. is the victim here. At this point, J. offers the knife he traded in place of the Monarch since I have apparently "declined the reality" that he traded it away (which inevitably means there is nothing he can do to get it back... including trying). I grudgingly accept the BM47 that he has pseudo-offered in a subsequent e-mail and await his reply (he's not usually speedy on e-mail replys unless it is to his advantage to do so, so I'm not holding my breath here). Hopefully this e-mail will warn his other trade-ee about J., if that deal has not gone through completely.
Well, all speculations aside about the truthfulness of his character and word, my major complaints/gripes about this "J. Jurianto" character are that he:
<b>1) sets terms for the trade (shipping together) and later says he's never heard of that.
2) knowingly manipulated and "erased" markings on the knife, before I even got his trade.
3) will not even attempt to get the trade back although it is clear that he is wrong. to me, trading the knife before the other partner has even receives his (and possibly before he shipped his out the final time, he didn't tell me when he made his deal) is WRONG
4) having the nerve to say I have set him up.
5) being a dick about the whole situation.</b>
Joe, I believe I afforded you many opportunities to rectify the situation before posting this. My goal is not to slander you, but to warn others about you so they will not get phucked the way I have and so they will not waste their time and money. Feel free to tell your story and defend yourself, but FYI, I have an ace in the hole. If you choose to fix this, I'm still listening.
<i>
------------------------------------------------------
E-mail References:
------------------------------------------------------
{1} by Joe
Well, usually when trading, people send the goods
together. So, here's my address :
Joseph Jurianto
62 Boylston St # 726
Boston, MA 02116
Phone : (617) 338-6437
I'll see if I can get the knife out today.
Thanks,
Joe
--- "Mr. T" <tsai@cmu.edu> wrote:
> Sure, thats a really slick design! I hate to ruin a
> pre-pro model, but oh
> well. What are you terms? I suggest send them
> together in the mail... my
> address is below if that is OK with you.
>
> hope to hear from you soon.
> andrew
-----------------------------------------------------
{2} by Joe
I was going to send you an email yesterday, but
suddenly my computer got frozen. Then, I could not go
online again (God, I hate Juno !!).
The package was sent back to me, it says something
about not known address. Please do not be alarmed,
this thing happens to me a lot.
So, I'll send the package again today, and I'll
include extra bonus. BTW, thanks for the band aid, I
use it already =)
For my credibility, please refer to ebay under the
name of joe_jurianto or yahoo under the name of
joe_juianto2805.
You will get your knife.
Thanks again,
Joe
--- "Mr. T" <tsai@cmu.edu> wrote:
> Joe-
>
> Hey, I noticed you were on the forums today. Did
> you get my other e-mail?
> I wanted to know if you sent the knife out on
> Saturday. Thanks, and I'd
> appreciate hearing back from you.
------------------------------------------------------
{3} by me
I hope you read my last e-mail (Wed. night). Basically, I have changed my
mind about our trade. Please return my knife, and I will do the same when
I get your knife (the BM450). And since we're trading back, please, also
refrain from playing with or flipping the knife, since I may need it to
trade at a later date. Thanks again, and please acknowledge that you
understand this e-mail and are returning my Monarch.
-------------------------------------------------------
{4} by Joe
Andrew,
Let ME get this straight. I have successfully traded
the Monarch with BM 47 and you expect me to believe
that this Monarch does not have any trade value ??
And in addition of that, you asked a compensation of
$65 ??
This is ME that has been taken advantage of. In the
last email I was trying to apologize, and I do not
expect to receive this kind of tone.
I disagree when you said that forum members send the
knife together. I often need to send my knife first
and email the tracking number before they send their
knives. Anyway, I did send the knife on the day you
did, but it was returned because of unknown address.
Then I sent it again on the following day. If there is
such agreement that trading must be done together at
the same day, I am not aware about it. I never read
the written agreement.
Theoretically, it is wise to wait until both parties
receive the knives. But in real world, no balisong
fans can resist not to play with a fine bali when
receiving it. I could have said 'I did not play with
it, I just erased the writing, and put it in my
collection box, bla bla bla' But I admitted that I had
played with your knife several times and also I had
let you know about it. Remember ?? 'Thanks for the
band aid, I am using it right now' <--- this is what
said.
I am also upset when you said I have fouled up this
deal. In my whole life, I have been succeeding in
respecting a business deals (internet) with many
people for a much more expensive items.
I have done deals about custom knives and antique
japanese swords. I have many references if need to see
what kind of person I am.
I know that I don't have the right to be upset, but
what you said and asked really offended me. It seems
to ME that you set me up. You might have waited until
I sent you email about my having played with the
knives and then decided to cancel the trade. Well, it
is clear why you asked for that much compensation and
declined the reality that I have succeeded trading the
Monarh with BM 47 satin finish.
If you only asked to give you the BM 47, I will gladly
do it since it is my fault. But, $65 compensation is
just absurd.
</i>
I am
about this situation! But don't think I wrote this e-mail in anger. I wrote it then waited nearly four hours before sending it.
<i> edited to fix html tags </i>
<i>Note: numbers scripted as "{x}" are references to e-mails which I'll post at the end.</i>
Let me draw you a timeline of the major events leading up to this post:
Thurs. Nov. 8 - Settle on a deal with J. I ask for his shipping terms, J. suggests shipping together and that he will try to ship today, I agree to his terms.{1}
Friday. Nov 9 - Ship out my Monarch balisong in exchange for his BM450. Notify J. J. acknowledges and says he got busy and will try to ship it tomorrow (Saturday). Fine with me.
Sat. 10 through Tues. 13, - Send multiple e-mails to J. asking if he's shipped the knife yet. No responses, although I did notice him perusing the balisong forums.
Wed. 14 - Get response from J. telling me that he got my package, but there was a problem with his shipping and that he had to resend it. Ok, I have my suspicions here, but I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. He also tells me that he's cut himself with it (I don't think too much of this, but he will try to use this against me later).{2}
Wed. 14, night time - I decide I don't like the smell of things and send an e-mail to J. stating that I am backing out of the trade all-together.
Fri. 16 - Repeat my sentiment to J. in yet another e-mail.{3}
Fri. 16 - J. informs me that he can't trade back because he has already traded the Monarch with somebody else (at this point I do not have his trade knife, yet he has already traded mine away). Also, not only has he manipulated it (somewhat understandable for a balisong nut), but he has also "erased" the printing on it which marked it as a first production run. J. shows no intention of getting the Monarch back because "As much as I want to return it to you, I have to respect my deal with [name of person here]."{4} Well, what happened to the respect for our deal? J. does apologize tersely, but gives no indication of rectifying the situation.
Fri. 16, again - I write back to J. telling him how dissappointed I am at this deal and what he has done. I ask for either the Monarch back (if he can get it back at this point) plus retribution (I asked for half the price I paid, $65) for the damage he's done to it or the full price I paid for the knife ($135). I explain certain etiquette which BF members usually extend to each other, such as waiting until both members are happy with deal before using or trading the knife away as well as shipping both knives at the same time. Again, I explain how I think he fouled up this deal and ask for him to make things right.
Fri. 16, J.'s resonse (this is a good one, see exhibit {4} below) - J. tells me, he thinks <b>HE</b> has been taken advantage of!! Since he tried to apologize in his last e-mail, apparently, he thinks he doesn't owe me anything else. J. disagrees that forum members send the knife together (as per one of my complaints), that he did send it and it got returned (fine, I'll believe him...), and that he never saw it in writing anyway. Please refer to exhibit {1} and the events of Nov. 8 again. His other comments are that he thinks I set him up because I knew that he played with the knife before backing out of the trade. Please refer to exhibit {2} as his proof of my "setting him up". Next J. claims that he is "upset" that I said he fouled this deal up. His proof?...
<i>"In my whole life, I have been succeeding in respecting a business deals (internet) with many people for a much more expensive items. I have done deals about custom knives and antique japanese swords."</i>
That folks, is his irrefutable proof that he did not foul this deal up. The flaw in your argument, J., is that past performance does not always predict future behavior, especially not in this case. He again claims that he's offended by my words because
<i>"It seems to ME that you set me up. You might have waited until I sent you email about my having played with the knives and then decided to cancel the trade."</i>
Yes, he might have me here, you found my trick... I make deals, wait until the other party has "played" with the knife, then cancel and ask for money back... it is a great strategy. This works especially well, WHEN I HAVEN'T EVEN RECEIVED THE KNIFE I WAS SUPPOSED TO GET! Clearly, J. is the victim here. At this point, J. offers the knife he traded in place of the Monarch since I have apparently "declined the reality" that he traded it away (which inevitably means there is nothing he can do to get it back... including trying). I grudgingly accept the BM47 that he has pseudo-offered in a subsequent e-mail and await his reply (he's not usually speedy on e-mail replys unless it is to his advantage to do so, so I'm not holding my breath here). Hopefully this e-mail will warn his other trade-ee about J., if that deal has not gone through completely.
Well, all speculations aside about the truthfulness of his character and word, my major complaints/gripes about this "J. Jurianto" character are that he:
<b>1) sets terms for the trade (shipping together) and later says he's never heard of that.
2) knowingly manipulated and "erased" markings on the knife, before I even got his trade.
3) will not even attempt to get the trade back although it is clear that he is wrong. to me, trading the knife before the other partner has even receives his (and possibly before he shipped his out the final time, he didn't tell me when he made his deal) is WRONG
4) having the nerve to say I have set him up.
5) being a dick about the whole situation.</b>
Joe, I believe I afforded you many opportunities to rectify the situation before posting this. My goal is not to slander you, but to warn others about you so they will not get phucked the way I have and so they will not waste their time and money. Feel free to tell your story and defend yourself, but FYI, I have an ace in the hole. If you choose to fix this, I'm still listening.
<i>
------------------------------------------------------
E-mail References:
------------------------------------------------------
{1} by Joe
Well, usually when trading, people send the goods
together. So, here's my address :
Joseph Jurianto
62 Boylston St # 726
Boston, MA 02116
Phone : (617) 338-6437
I'll see if I can get the knife out today.
Thanks,
Joe
--- "Mr. T" <tsai@cmu.edu> wrote:
> Sure, thats a really slick design! I hate to ruin a
> pre-pro model, but oh
> well. What are you terms? I suggest send them
> together in the mail... my
> address is below if that is OK with you.
>
> hope to hear from you soon.
> andrew
-----------------------------------------------------
{2} by Joe
I was going to send you an email yesterday, but
suddenly my computer got frozen. Then, I could not go
online again (God, I hate Juno !!).
The package was sent back to me, it says something
about not known address. Please do not be alarmed,
this thing happens to me a lot.
So, I'll send the package again today, and I'll
include extra bonus. BTW, thanks for the band aid, I
use it already =)
For my credibility, please refer to ebay under the
name of joe_jurianto or yahoo under the name of
joe_juianto2805.
You will get your knife.
Thanks again,
Joe
--- "Mr. T" <tsai@cmu.edu> wrote:
> Joe-
>
> Hey, I noticed you were on the forums today. Did
> you get my other e-mail?
> I wanted to know if you sent the knife out on
> Saturday. Thanks, and I'd
> appreciate hearing back from you.
------------------------------------------------------
{3} by me
I hope you read my last e-mail (Wed. night). Basically, I have changed my
mind about our trade. Please return my knife, and I will do the same when
I get your knife (the BM450). And since we're trading back, please, also
refrain from playing with or flipping the knife, since I may need it to
trade at a later date. Thanks again, and please acknowledge that you
understand this e-mail and are returning my Monarch.
-------------------------------------------------------
{4} by Joe
Andrew,
Let ME get this straight. I have successfully traded
the Monarch with BM 47 and you expect me to believe
that this Monarch does not have any trade value ??
And in addition of that, you asked a compensation of
$65 ??
This is ME that has been taken advantage of. In the
last email I was trying to apologize, and I do not
expect to receive this kind of tone.
I disagree when you said that forum members send the
knife together. I often need to send my knife first
and email the tracking number before they send their
knives. Anyway, I did send the knife on the day you
did, but it was returned because of unknown address.
Then I sent it again on the following day. If there is
such agreement that trading must be done together at
the same day, I am not aware about it. I never read
the written agreement.
Theoretically, it is wise to wait until both parties
receive the knives. But in real world, no balisong
fans can resist not to play with a fine bali when
receiving it. I could have said 'I did not play with
it, I just erased the writing, and put it in my
collection box, bla bla bla' But I admitted that I had
played with your knife several times and also I had
let you know about it. Remember ?? 'Thanks for the
band aid, I am using it right now' <--- this is what
said.
I am also upset when you said I have fouled up this
deal. In my whole life, I have been succeeding in
respecting a business deals (internet) with many
people for a much more expensive items.
I have done deals about custom knives and antique
japanese swords. I have many references if need to see
what kind of person I am.
I know that I don't have the right to be upset, but
what you said and asked really offended me. It seems
to ME that you set me up. You might have waited until
I sent you email about my having played with the
knives and then decided to cancel the trade. Well, it
is clear why you asked for that much compensation and
declined the reality that I have succeeded trading the
Monarh with BM 47 satin finish.
If you only asked to give you the BM 47, I will gladly
do it since it is my fault. But, $65 compensation is
just absurd.
</i>
I am
about this situation! But don't think I wrote this e-mail in anger. I wrote it then waited nearly four hours before sending it.<i> edited to fix html tags </i>
