Removed from legitimate GBU thread

[craytab]

It's called integrity, Karda.

Exactly.

But putting integrity aside there are also these things called the exchange rules. He has broken multiple of them many times over. With doing just a cursory amount of research with the search engine this is easily verified.

When searching his user name and the word "withdrawn" you come up with at least 11 instances where he has withdrawn an item.

1st Rule for Selling:

"Be 100% sure that you want to sell the item, have it in your possession and clearly list the selling price. There is no "testing the waters" or "gauge buyer interest".

For whatever reason he is not following this rule which has resulted in many members having their time and money tied up with his BS. Whether he has items listed other places is of little concern when he can't follow the first and most basic rule we have. I get it, sometimes we all might want to withdraw an. But to do it time after time even after accepting payment for said items? Nope.

Also when looking through his started threads it shows on multiple occasions that he has not complied with Rule 9:

"You must wait 14 days (2 weeks) to relist an item for the second time. So once you list an item for sale, that item cannot appear for a second time in a sales thread until 2 weeks have passed from the date of the original thread. Bumping threads or "BTTT" in the sales sections has been disabled due to abuse."

We all know why this rule is here. So members can't screw over other members listing the same item over and over to ensure their listing stays at the top. This person does not care about other members. Hell, he listed that Sebenza 3 times withing 14 days!

So, with my most basic amount of research we can see that not only does this guy have no integrity but he is also breaking the rules here and has done so multiple times over causing lost time, holding up peoples money, and not playing fair in the exchange. We don't need this guy here.

 

[craytab]

Yes, you know exactly how everyone will react. Thanks for changing the subject I was actually referring to.....items listed on other sites, which there is no reference to in the rules and that rule you referred to does not cover.

Wrong. See rule #1 here on the forums for selling. If you are not willing to sell it then don't list it. How is that so hard to understand?

 

[Karda]

Wrong. See rule #1 here on the forums for selling. If you are not willing to sell it then don't list it. How is that so hard to understand?

Wrong. It looks to me like he's willing to sell it. According to the OP, it sold on Ebay.

 

[craytab]

Wrong. It looks to me like he's willing to sell it. According to the OP, it sold on Ebay.

You can't be serious. Why screw around here with this stuff? If you are doing it to make a point, your point is factually incorrect (maybe you missed the mods posting in this thread referring you to the first rule of selling here). Anything else you are doing I believe we have all been told not to do (so stop doing it).

 

[RevDevil]

I know exactly what integrity is.


Yes, you know exactly how everyone will react. Thanks for changing the subject I was actually referring to.....items listed on other sites, which there is no reference to in the rules and that rule you referred to does not cover.

Wrong. It looks to me like he's willing to sell it. According to the OP, it sold on Ebay.

The problem with this behavior is that a member is making a purchase and sending money in good faith. Fully expecting the second half of the transaction to be fulfilled. When they discover that it is not, THAT IS A PROBLEM. There is a lack of information on the part of the seller that causes undue inconvenience to the potential buyers. Again, if the seller wants to cross list it, no big deal, a little courtesy goes a long way. Other members have said "This item is listed elsewhere, first I'll take it gets it" or similar. I appreciate your position, however, it is exactly like a reverse form of gauging interest/testing the waters. That is the overall interpretation. I can rewrite that rule if it makes everyone feel better, I'd wager some money that Spark wouldn't mind either especially if it keeps the Exchange running smoothly.

 

[Karda]

The problem with this behavior is that a member is making a purchase and sending money in good faith. Fully expecting the second half of the transaction to be fulfilled. When they discover that it is not, THAT IS A PROBLEM. There is a lack of information on the part of the seller that causes undue inconvenience to the potential buyers. Again, if the seller wants to cross list it, no big deal, a little courtesy goes a long way. Other members have said "This item is listed elsewhere, first I'll take it gets it" or similar. I appreciate your position, however, it is exactly like a reverse form of gauging interest/testing the waters. That is the overall interpretation. I can rewrite that rule if it makes everyone feel better, I'd wager some money that Spark wouldn't mind either especially if it keeps the Exchange running smoothly.

You can "interpret" what it is all you like. Just like there is no rule against cross posting sales on other sites, there is also no rule that sales on other sites must be mentioned in the sales ad. More or less it's the seller choosing who he sells to. The knife is sold and the OP has his money. It was promptly returned (be thankful). There was no sale. I've already stated that I don't agree with him accepting payment, but due to lack of overall information from the OP and none from the seller here, perhaps there are some circumstance of which we are unaware. The sellers paypal is listed in the ad. Perhaps the OP jumped the gun a little and didn't notify the seller he was sending payment before he sent it? Either way a member shouldn't be held accountable for others actions or "handled" over an "interpretation" of a rule that doesn't exist.

 

[craytab]

You can "interpret" what it is all you like. Just like there is no rule against cross posting sales on other sites, there is also no rule that sales on other sites must be mentioned in the sales ad. More or less it's the seller choosing who he sells to. The knife is sold and the OP has his money. It was promptly returned (be thankful). There was no sale. I've already stated that I don't agree with him accepting payment, but due to lack of overall information from the OP and none from the seller here, perhaps there are some circumstance of which we are unaware. The sellers paypal is listed in the ad. Perhaps the OP jumped the gun a little and didn't notify the seller he was sending payment before he sent it? Either way a member shouldn't be held accountable for others actions or "handled" over an "interpretation" of a rule that doesn't exist.

11 withdrawn knives and you still want to defend this guy

 

[Karda]

11 withdrawn knives and you still want to defend this guy

Plus 3 dings on the iTrader for it.

Whether you think it is right, wrong or are indifferent to it altogether there is a pattern.

Lets operate on FACTS here:

We see multiple "withdrawns" from some members". Does this mean they all have some nefarious motive? There also is no rule against withdrawing an item.

As for the 3 dings on Itrader? One of them is from the OP here. What I see there is no transactions completed, therefore no Itrader feedback should have been left. That IS a listed rule, Why haven't those people been warned/infracted for "improper usage of the Itrader system"? Perhaps the OP here should have done his due diligence as a buyer also and not put himself in this position if this member is so awful. The OP here also failed to provide enough factual information according to the New Ground Rules for the GBU. Does this mean we should not trust the OP?
We should be operating on actual fact, NOT the assumptions and insinuations some of you are making in this thread, which BTW is also against those new groundrules. Some of you have a clear repeated habit of sticking your noses in here and doing so and relishing in it, BTW.

I see no TGB&U threads from the other 2 members who left him a negative on a deal that wasn't completed. What I do see is 12 other transactions of high praise for the seller. I also see these listed in this very forum:
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...WestFlorida-is-the-Man!?highlight=westflorida
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...-deal-with-Westflorida!?highlight=westflorida
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/s...action-with-westflorida?highlight=westflorida
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/280910-WestFlorida?highlight=westflorida

 

[RevDevil]

The seller in this case has been asked not once, but twice to provide comment on this situation. Withdrawing in this specific case once is no problem, twice is an accident, 11 times in my mind establishes some sort of a pattern by definition. I'm not going to start splitting hairs here with anyone, I don't care what it involves. If money is changing hands then the second half of the transaction (aka shipping the goods) needs to happen. The lack of any explanation on the part of the seller is what people seem to find disturbing. I am seeing a lot of comments from people that actively participate, buy, sell, and trade items in the Exchange, and I see comments from people that do not buy, nor sell, nor trade anything in the Exchange. So, what should these active members think when they discover they just transacted with a serial flaker (unknowingly). If this happened to me, and I later found out that 10 other people fell for the same thing, I know I'd be a bit pissed off. By the same token, if everyone in the world were so careful and did all of their due diligence, we'd have no fraud, theft, con artists, scamming, or the need for moderation anywhere.

 

[benchwarmer380]

You are right Karda, based on the rules they weren't completed transactions and iTrader shouldn't have been left. The members who left it would have been better off mentioning their experience here if they felt the transaction (or lack thereof) warranted notation.

He can report those and have Spark look at them and removed if necessary. Besides the most recent one there has been ample time to do so.

Yes, it is not right to judge or assume based on one side of the story but at this time that is all we have. That and what can be found on iTrader, GBU, and previous posts. I appreciate clear communication in my transactions as that usually lends to a positive and smooth transaction. If i get a hint that that wont be the case I move along. Which is what I intend to do here.

I truly hope to be proven wrong.

 

[Karda]

The seller in this case has been asked not once, but twice to provide comment on this situation. Withdrawing in this specific case once is no problem, twice is an accident, 11 times in my mind establishes some sort of a pattern by definition. I'm not going to start splitting hairs here with anyone, I don't care what it involves. If money is changing hands then the second half of the transaction (aka shipping the goods) needs to happen. The lack of any explanation on the part of the seller is what people seem to find disturbing. I am seeing a lot of comments from people that actively participate, buy, sell, and trade items in the Exchange, and I see comments from people that do not buy, nor sell, nor trade anything in the Exchange. So, what should these active members think when they discover they just transacted with a serial flaker (unknowingly). If this happened to me, and I later found out that 10 other people fell for the same thing, I know I'd be a bit pissed off. By the same token, if everyone in the world were so careful and did all of their due diligence, we'd have no fraud, theft, con artists, scamming, or the need for moderation anywhere.

But we don't actually know why he's withdrawn so many times, do we? It doesn't always automatically mean it's for the wrong reasons. There are a myriad of reasons people mark their threads as such. Again, there is no rule stating one cannot "withdraw" a sale or that explanation needs to be given for doing so.
You yourself have written that members should do their own due diligence and properly communicate with each other. Now, you are saying here that they don't need to. Which is it?
If anyone is in the Exchange enough, you will see there are other members repeatedly marking their threads "withdrawn". Where is the "witch hunt" for these people? Why aren't they being handled also? Why are the 3 people who've left the member in question here negative Itrader feedback when no transaction was completed not being "handled" also?

 

[Ken44]

But we don't actually know why he's withdrawn so many times, do we? It doesn't always automatically mean it's for the wrong reasons. There are a myriad of reasons people mark their threads as such. Again, there is no rule stating one cannot "withdraw" a sale or that explanation needs to be given for doing so.
You yourself have written that members should do their own due diligence and properly communicate with each other. Now, you are saying here that they don't need to. Which is it?
If anyone is in the Exchange enough, you will see there are other members repeatedly marking their threads "withdrawn". Where is the "witch hunt" for these people? Why aren't they being handled also? Why are the 3 people who've left the member in question here negative Itrader feedback when no transaction was completed not being "handled" also?

There is no witch hunt.
And there is nothing wrong with withdrawing an item. Many change their mind.
What is wrong is when someone takes money for the item sold only to refund it when it sells elsewhere.

He should not have put his PP addy in the listing if it was listed elsewhere. He also should've mentioned in the add that the knife was listed elsewhere.

Don't know if he broke rules, but if he takes money and doesn't complete the deal it kind of sounds like he did. I'll leave that to the Supers to figure out, as should you.

I'm just saying he showed terrible form in doing what he did. I sure hope you don't condone the way he ran his sale.

The seller has been asked to reply in this thread. Hopefully he will soon.

 

[RevDevil]

Not according to the rules. Itrader should only be used for items that have fully completed the process of sales. Money sent and Item shipped.
If the transaction has not completed this process, Itrader should not be used. Instead a TGB&U can be started. Stating, in a clear and concise manner with FACTS only, what transpired. The moderators then should act as a neutral party to the process and not act on the many insinuations, speculations and such that some members habitually clutter up these threads with. Best to give a supporting paid member the benefit of doubt until such time as there is none and the facts are supported with evidence, not hearsay.

You're not saying anything that most everyone here doesn't already know. You are also insulating and speculating, nothing you've said has any more weight or value than anyone else. Best let the moderators of the forums handle things, don't you think? Your opinion has been shoved into this thread enough as it is, now let it go and find someone else to bestow your opinion on. Your drifting this thread around is NOT helping.

 

[benchwarmer380]

Not according to the rules. Itrader should only be used for items that have fully completed the process of sales. Money sent and Item shipped.
If the transaction has not completed this process, Itrader should not be used. Instead a TGB&U can be started. Stating, in a clear and concise manner with FACTS only, what transpired. The moderators then should act as a neutral party to the process and not act on the many insinuations, speculations and such that some members habitually clutter up these threads with. Best to give a supporting paid member the benefit of doubt until such time as there is none and the facts are supported with evidence, not hearsay.

The rules are the rules. I am all for rules as they help sustain order. Are they literally black and white though?

A hypothetical. A seller with 50+ sells an item to a member. They get paid but do not ship the item. The member waits and waits and receives nothing. The buyer eventually gets their money back from a successful PayPal dispute. Does said member with 50+ not deserve a red card on their iTrader rating? Per the rules they would not.

That is purely a hypothetical situation and does not relate to the parties or instances in this thread. It is just my opinion that while the rules are in place and are to be followed, they can not cover every possible situation that may occur.


Edit to add: Although succinct and lacking a time frame of what happened he did explain what had transpired. Seller confirmed it was available, OP paid, money was returned because it was sold on eBay. Pretty clear and concise to me.

 

[Karda]

There is no witch hunt.

Kind of looks like the usual insinuations and speculations equivalent to a witch hunt from here.

And there is nothing wrong with withdrawing an item. Many change their mind.
What is wrong is when someone takes money for the item sold only to refund it when it sells elsewhere.

Again, there is no rule in place against either of these things. I can't tell you how many times I've seen members return money sent because they chose not to do business with the person who sent it, as is the sellers prerogative. The seller chooses who he will sell to.

He should not have put his PP addy in the listing if it was listed elsewhere. He also should've mentioned in the add that the knife was listed elsewhere.

There is no rule against putting ones paypal addy in the sales ad. There are hundreds of people doing so. And for the 3rd time, there is no rule that states items listed elsewhere must be mentioned in the ad. Have you read the whole thread?

Don't know if he broke rules, but if he takes money and doesn't complete the deal it kind of sounds like he did. I'll leave that to the Supers to figure out, as should you.

I'm just saying he showed terrible form in doing what he did. I sure hope you don't condone the way he ran his sale.

He broke no listed rules, which is what should be operated on. Not hearsay, speculation, butthurt or anger.

You are voicing your opinion here aren't you? Please allow others the same courtesy.

Suppose I did list an item here and on Ebay. A member here purchased the item and an Ebay buyer did also. According to Ebays clear rules and rules about contractual obligation, I would be obligated to sell the item to the Ebay purchaser because the transaction was completed and I could not void the sale because one can only withdraw items sold elsewhere while the bidding is still active and not after it is completed. I would then have to refund the buyer here and endure the rampant wolves in this forum.

 

[Karda]

You're not saying anything that most everyone here doesn't already know. You are also insulating and speculating, nothing you've said has any more weight or value than anyone else. Best let the moderators of the forums handle things, don't you think? Your opinion has been shoved into this thread enough as it is, now let it go and find someone else to bestow your opinion on. Your drifting this thread around is NOT helping.

I Insulate nothing.

What in the item you quoted is speculative?
Is it my fault that the rules here are not as concise or complete as Ebays policies?
The only thing I've done is give hypotheticals, as a counter to the speculations being broadly broadcast here. I dislike seeing people being railroaded.The speculations and such here aren't helping the situation either. Are they allowed because they happen to agree?

 

[Ken44]

Kind of looks like the usual insinuations and speculations equivalent to a witch hunt from here.

Again, there is no rule in place against either of these things. I can't tell you how many times I've seen members return money sent because they chose not to do business with the person who sent it, as is the sellers prerogative. The seller chooses who he will sell to.

There is no rule against putting ones paypal addy in the sales ad. There are hundreds of people doing so. And for the 3rd time, there is no rule that states items listed elsewhere must be mentioned in the ad. Have you read the whole thread?

He broke no listed rules, which is what should be operated on. Not hearsay, speculation, butthurt or anger.

You are voicing your opinion here aren't you? Please allow others the same courtesy.

Suppose I did list an item here and on Ebay. A member here purchased the item and an Ebay buyer did also. According to Ebays clear rules and rules about contractual obligation, I would be obligated to sell the item to the Ebay purchaser because the transaction was completed and I could not void the sale because one can only withdraw items sold elsewhere while the bidding is still active and not after it is completed. I would then have to refund the buyer here and endure the rampant wolves in this forum.

Wow,lol. Maybe you should read my whole post again. I didn't say if I knew if he had broken rules.
I sure hope you don't condone the way he ran his sale.
He did tell the buyer the item was available before the buyer sent funds.

And as I said, the rules decisions are for the Super's to figure out, and not you(or I).

You're not saying anything that most everyone here doesn't already know. You are also insulating and speculating, nothing you've said has any more weight or value than anyone else. Best let the moderators of the forums handle things, don't you think? Your opinion has been shoved into this thread enough as it is, now let it go and find someone else to bestow your opinion on. Your drifting this thread around is NOT helping.

Maybe you need to read this post again as well.

BTW- no witch hunt going on at all.

 

[Ken44]

I dislike seeing people being railroaded.The speculations and such here aren't helping the situation either. Are they allowed because they happen to agree?

You know full well that the seller has been asked to respond here. If the OP's story is wrong he is more than welcome to tell his side.

 

[Karda]

You know full well that the seller has been asked to respond here. If the OP's story is wrong he is more than welcome to tell his side.

Yes, I am aware of that, and yes, he is welcome to tell his side. Until then everyone should stop speculating no matter how valid or entitled they feel they are. It would be best for those actually involved in the transaction and for the moderators.

Still we are left only with the clear evidence of improper Itrader usage. Theres no denying it. The members that did so should be warned as others have been for the same practice and the seller informed of his right to contest those improper feedbacks. He may not know.

 

[Ken44]

Yes, I am aware of that, and yes, he is welcome to tell his side. Until then everyone should stop speculating no matter how valid or entitled they feel they are. It would be best for those actually involved in the transaction and for the moderators.

Still we are left only with the clear evidence of improper Itrader usage. Theres no denying it. The members that did so should be warned as others have been for the same practice and the seller informed of his right to contest those improper feedbacks. He may not know.

So no one should reply in the GB&U until the other party shows up ???
It's never been that way, and that way would never work. The offending party would never show up if it was that way.
If the offending party wants to participate that's his choice.

Lets just drop this between you and I. We aren't helping a bit at this point.