mbassoc2003 wrote:Jon Barrett - I am sure that at the time, you and many other people here had the exact same response to telephone calls to the phone number provided by eBay. I would also imagine many people received the same nil response to mail. That said, I do know that someone WAS responding to e-mails up until a few weeks beofre his account was terminated because I bought some 40 or 50 Planescape items in one go, and I had a debate with the guy over him wanting to withdraw from the transaction. His excuse at that time was that whilst his auctions accepted personal cheques he could not wait for a cheque from me and eBay had already charged him the fees for the sale and he claimed he couldn't cover the fees without me paying with PayPal immediately and wouldn't accept a cheque. Now, if you have confirmation that Jon Barrett is real, and resides at his then given address, then please clarify this. Either way, he ceased all communication with me after his eBay account was suspended. As I'm sure you are aware, if you send money to an account that does not exist, it remains unclaimed and is then cancelled. If you phone PayPal and ask about an unclaimed payment, they will confirm whether or not the account exicts. If you don't believe me, try it.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Lisa's Stuff - I will go back through my history and see, but I really don't think eBay keep a log of correspondence that long. And again, I doubt I'm the only one who asked if she was the same person, and I'm sure she was polite in responding to all of us.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Chargebacks - No, your premis is that chargeback only becomes theft if you can't make restitution in the event that the package arrives. Am I right? That IS what you're saying, isn't it.[/
mbassoc2003 wrote:The one thing I did learm from my encounters with Jonb and his subsequent disappearing act is that the bad guy doesn't always win. Whilst I did end up better off from my encounter with Jonb, I have not bought anything from Lisa. And, yes, I do advocate taking militant action against people who persistantly screw the buying public.
mbassoc2003 wrote:But to put this in perspective, I have 'lost' more stuff in the mail to various countries around the world as a seller than I have ever had go missing when I've bought stuff on eBay. I do not assume that these buyers are lying or stealing from me, and I refund in good faith. I have never had an item that has gone missing get delivered eventually, and never had a refund returned to me. I am not about to label any of my customers a thief.
RaisedFromTheDead wrote:Ian's right on all counts. You do whatever it takes to correct the situation. Failure to do so is why our country is such a pit.I have no issues with conning/frauding a known thief, and I feel pity for anyone who isn't strong-willed or moral enough to do so. I attribute it to the general sheepishness and weakness of character endemic to our society.
bclarkie wrote:...others did so with absolutely no intention of ever paying for the the item(s) and stole from him.
mbassoc2003 wrote:The Jonb Incident - Thank-you for jogging my memory there. That's been a great trip fown memory lane. The entire transaction with Jonb is a matter of record in this nice little 4 page thread on Acaeum from May 2005 ....http://www.acaeum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2074&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0As you can see, I sought the forum's advice at the time as I was a relative newbie back then, and Jonb voluntarily refunded me the transaction before F'ing off and screwing everyone else. I guess corresponding with him extensively did pay off and he felt some form of need to do good by me.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I got some nice rares off him last time for free. The guy was a real gem. I tried to pay the guy and he'd shut up shop. I even e-mailed him offering to pay but he seemed to want me to keep the stuff for free. A real sweet deal. Anyone remember Tales of the Ruby Dragon?It came from Jonb.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Chargebacks - There were lots of us from Acaeum who took the chance and bought from Jonb. I seem to remember numbered copies of Kobold Hall and Blasted Lands being bought by boards members at the time. And I'm sure when it all went tits up, I'm not the only one to have tried to recover their money through their credit card or PayPal. The fact that I had built up a rapport with Jonb through extensive e-mail correspondence months before, and my item eventually arrived does not make me any more a thief than anyone else. The only difference is that I admitted the item arrived and tried to repay for it. That is EXACTLY what you did with you're buyer, and the above thread shows no intent at the time to steal from him, which is what you accuse me of.
mbassoc2003 wrote:So, did anyone take my advice and rip the guy off before he started stiffing everone else?
mbassoc2003 wrote:Buy.Wait 14 days.Chargeback sighting writing on the wall and non-delivery.If the item turns up, offer to pay for the goods. If she's gone by then, hay-ho. I'm sure she'll ask for the money if she wants it.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Law Enforcement - As I'm sure you are aware from you're own country, Law Enforcement will not record or investigate online instances of fraud reported to them bu the public. They refer you to your bank or credit card issuer.
mbassoc2003 wrote:If Law Enforcement in the US does spend it's time recording and investigating stuff like this, that explains how the US has such a bad record in dealing with crime and highest levels of crime in the world.
mbassoc2003 wrote:In the UK these sorts of things do not take up Law Enforcement time. They are left to be sorted out by the financial companies and persons involved and it works just fine and leaves our Law Enforcement to deal with more serious matters than a bunch of guys on eBay.
mbassoc2003 wrote:White Dwarf - Yes, I had a guy buy and item from me, complain it had not been delivered, and ask for a replacement to be sent, whic I did. He subsequently received both items and then stopped responding to e-mails etc. He got two for the price of one, and I had no claim through the Royal Mail because he had signed for both. Whilst I cannot blame him for the delay, he was not honest enough to admit what happened and return the goods. He simply disappeared.
mbassoc2003 wrote:The differences are honesty and integrity. In all instances, I have been honest, open and transparent about my eBay dealings, to the extent of going into unnecessary levels of detail here in public, and under your scrutiny (and others) to assuage my critics.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I am not the one in any of these instances who has done a disappearing act, given fake names and addressed with the intent to commit fraud, and then F'd off and refused to respond to anyone's mail or e-mails. Everyone knows who I am, where I am and how to get in touch with me.
mbassoc2003 wrote:You're moral compass is a bit F'd up here, Brian, and your tirade and focus are misplaced.
mbassoc2003 wrote:You're rants and accusations are beginning to undermine you're credibility as a moral crusader. One which some people here, myself included, have appreciated over the years.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Now, the fact that I changed my moral stance on Jonb following the way he dealt with people (bearing in mind that this was my first encounter with the guy), and the fact that I happenned to see my situation as a winning one; does not make me a thief. It may mean I have a different opinion to you, but it does not make me a thief.
mbassoc2003 wrote:And the fact that my moral opinion is such that, like some others, I consider it acceptable to screw the guy before he screws others, and that I explore or advocate the use of this type of militant vigilate type of action, does not make me a thief.
mbassoc2003 wrote:It may make ma a supporter or proponent of 'theft' but I have not taken action against Lisa's eBay offerings as, whilst I have all the evidence I am ever likely to receive, I have not managed to convince anyone to provide me with a name, address or phone number for them. I cannot corroberate the belief that they are one and the same. At very best, you can alledge that Jonb abandoned his funds and I have been public in my statement that I still hold them. Regardless, after all your hot air and moral peacocking, I fail to see what I did that was either thieving or morally wrong. I bought from him in good faith. I had a good rapport with the guy by e-mail. He f'd off and screwed a lot of buyers and I view my situation as a win.
mbassoc2003 wrote:You confessed yourself to having done exactly the same thing. Explain where the theft occurred and how that action was perpetrated by me.
RaisedFromTheDead wrote:I've had personal dealings with Ian, in situations where he certainly had the opportunity to try and stiff me, and he has been exemplary.
RaisedFromTheDead wrote: I don't believe for a minute he would intentionally screw anyone.
mbassoc2003 wrote:If you didn't bother to check any of those things out at the time, you clearly weren't all that interested in bringing down this scumbag as you so righteously claim.1. Sorry, Brian, but you seem to have stooped to BS now. I have never said that I believe my actions were theft. Those are your accusations. I may consider it a win, but if you go back 5 years to the incident thread you flagged up, you'll see that I tried to pay for the goods. There was no intent to steal, and you and I both know that the guy's phone number and address were either bogus, or made out to be bogus by the owner after everything went tits up.
mbassoc2003 wrote:You and I both know his accounts were terminated and his e-mail address was fake. If you didn't bother to check any of those things out at the time, you clearly weren't all that interested in bringing down this scumbag as you so righteously claim.
mbassoc2003 wrote:If you didn't bother to check any of those things out at the time, you clearly weren't all that interested in bringing down this scumbag as you so righteously claim.2. Advocating theft from a thief is not theft. It is a staement and a moral position, not an action.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Just as advocating speeding in a motor vehicle is not a speeding offence. I stole nothing. If anything, I am holding funds for an individual who refuses to claim them. At best, I am openly admitting to and offering a banking service to some AH who left me holding his money when he F'd off. You're consideration of this as theft is quite contemptable and seriously morally F'd up. If you are so righteous and morally judicious, why not get off your arse and provide the details by which I can repay these funds to their owner. Let's see you do better.
mbassoc2003 wrote:3. I, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, have complained to eBay and asked them to investigate the link between Lisa and the previous fraudsters. That is as far as I can go legally, and as our moral crusader on this board, I'm sure you have taken steps to pursue the fraudster yourself. Or is it a case that you just spout off your opinions and moral judgements, and don't actually get off your high horse and do anything there either?
mbassoc2003 wrote:Why not come clean and let us all know what you know about this person and how to get ahold of them?We all await with baited breath.....
bclarkie wrote:Theft is theft, period.
bclarkie wrote:'s not my job to make an effort for you to pay someone who owe money to. Even if we already didn't know who this person currently was, you'd just make up another excuse to not pay, like you've already done so many times in the past.
bclarkie wrote:Again Ian your very own words clearly indicate your intent. It's a plain as day.
bclarkie wrote:Theft is theft, period. And I'm the one who has been MOST on top of this clowns antics for many years now. I know more about him then I've even posted here.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Jonb's e-mail address posted on his PayPal transaction was a dead end. Fake, Nil response. No such PayPal account. Unclaimed funds. I e-mailed Mr B for about a month on a yahoo address that was never responded to after his account was closed.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Speeding is speeding regardless od what you call it or how you get there. There are stacks of AHs in the US who have been speeding in their Lexus's and Toyota's who should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for speeding offences and presumably reckless endangerment of their kids, because their car 'chose' to accelerate while they were driving. Is that how your logic works? Your moral world and ideology are seriously flawed, Brian.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I'm sorry, my command of the English language is failing me at this point. Please elaborate and explain how you came to this conclusion based on what I've been saying.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Prove it. I see no further information contributed to the forum. I see nothing that identifies anyone or how to get in touch with them. It's all very well to say, "I know this, I know that, but it's not my responsibility to take action or assist others in taking action.
mbassoc2003 wrote:But that completely undermines your moral superiority here, and your claim that you know more about this clown and have been on his case for years. Quit squirming and put up, or shut up.
bclarkie wrote:You didn't answer my question, so I'll ask it again. How did you correspond with him through a fake email address?
bclarkie wrote:What in the world are you talking about and why are you trying to change the subject? At what point was this discussion ever about speeding and further, at what point have I advocated that people should get away with it or not?
bclarkie wrote:You've stolen from him and made it quite clear just how happy you were about it, so much so that you've advocated others following suit. And to reiterate, this isn't the first time this idea has been bandied about.
bclarkie wrote:Good grief, this nonsense again? How exactly does this undermine this supposed moral authority that keep droning on about?
mbassoc2003 wrote:Wow. Read the answer. I e-mailed Jonb through a Yahoo e-mail account he was operating. For about a month prior to buying RD1, initiated by an incident when I attempted to buy some 30 or 40, mainly Planescape, items all in one go. That e-mail address was termianated or not replied to when he ceased dealing with all the muppets on eBay. The e-mail address posted on his PayPal account, was not the e-mail address that ID'd his PayPal account, and was not a legitimate e-mail address. Why the hell do you think you you have the moral superiority or right to scrutinise my every word. Are you accusing me of lying yet again? Where is all this knowledge you claim to have, because you seem to be just [email protected] your way along now?
mbassoc2003 wrote:It's called 'comparison'. You claim that theft is theft regardless of how you end up with someone elses property. By your logic therefor, speeding is speeding. I was drawing a comparison, not changing the subject.
mbassoc2003 wrote:You seem to be losing your grasp of English now, or clutching at straws. Are you saying that theft is theft regardless of how you end up with someone elses property, but that is only applicable to the crime of theft, and all other crimes have special dispensation? It's a comparison.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I was pointing out the flaw in your philosophy. You seem to think only crimes Bclarkie deem to pass judgement on are crimes, regardless of any willingness to back your accusations up with either facts or and explanation of where it is deemed a crime in law. There is no law against being left holding someone's money, even if under Bclarkie Law it's stealing.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Oops! My English again. Too many complex sentence structures, or too much assumption on my part that I didn't need to explain things in detail. We all assume ('take ownership of' not 'guess at') a moral position and a level of authority when we post in open forum. It is impled by our words and the tone in which we write, and yours is one of authority and judgemental superiority. It is not 'claimed' in a declaration, but 'claimed' by virtue or our action in posts and responses.
mbassoc2003 wrote:By labeling me a thief you state your moral position. By then responding to the facts in the case and further finding your own evidence from Acaeum's history that I had forgotten was there, by ignoring that both sets of facts corroberate eachother, and the laying down your moral principle that I am still a thief because unlike you I have not managed to track down Jonb, you are assuming a position of moral superiority and exacting a judgement that I am a thief regardless of my intentions to return a payment.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Finally, you state that I am a thief because I have not taken suffiecient steps to find and repay Jonb, yet you yourself claim to be the person who knows most about this "clown scum bag", and you yourself will not provide any information to allow me find the gentleman, either because you do not have such information or will not pass it along. If you do not have sufficient information about the gentleman's identity, you are undermining you're claimed authority because you yourself cannot find him and you live in the same damn country as the guy, and if you do have the information, you undermine your claimed moral authority by not passing it along.
mbassoc2003 wrote:Whilst I am willing to continue this debate on our moral positions, it will become tedious and futile if I need to contine elaborating and explaining English sentence structure and meanings. I cannot be the only one who understood the English that I wrote.
bclarkie wrote:So you had access to his Paypal account to know which email address was attached to it? That's a pretty neat trick. How in the world did you come up with that one? And why aren't you using the same technique with the current incarnation of lisas_stuff_too?
bclarkie wrote:It's a "comparison" to create a situation that not only doesn't even remotely apply to this one, nor does it have anything to do with a position that I've ever taken, let alone one that I've taken with respect to this issue? Ok. And yes, whilst I haven't actually taken a position on it before(and not that it really matters with respect to this topic), believe it or not, speeding is in fact speeding. I guess that doesn't actually jive with your line of thinking, but that's a different topic for a different thread.
bclarkie wrote:For the record, clutching at straws would actually be constituted by bringing up things that have nothing to do with the topic at hand or even positions that a poster has ever taken previously and using them as a comparison.
bclarkie wrote:Ian, why are you so angry? I mean, if you're so convinced that your actions are such a good and just thing, I'm not entirely sure why you're so worked up about it. Also, if you condone stealing form a thief, why not revel in your position that you're supposedly content with?
bclarkie wrote:You're claims of finding the bad guy is starting to rival that of OJ Simpson.
RaisedFromTheDead wrote:He's angry because you're gunning for him over a trivial issue. I'd be too. This is stretching the limits of what the Acaeum is here for.
