Pipswich wrote:junogrrl She either realized her major pricing error and sold the books to someone else for more money.... or she stole photos without knowing what she was doing. (Note that I didn't ask for this price, I just stumbled into it quite happily, I thought!)The photo is of a beautiful first printing of Greyhawk, And, what seemed likely to be first printings of EW and Swords and Spells.What I got was an 11th printing Greyhawk, 8th printing EW and a soiled, spotted and cover stained 4th of Swords and Spells. None, obviously have the 5.00 price on the bottom.Still a good buy of course, but what a frustrating package to get today. ** expired/removed eBay auction **
Pipswich wrote:*grin*Wonder how many purchases qualify for fun finds and shady seller, lol. Odd circumstance for sure. I looked over the books carefully and she noted two had names inside, which these do. And they were shipped from Juneau AK a day after they were bought on ebay. I think I must conclude that she did simply lift the photos unknowingly. That or there is a shady collector near Juneau, lol.
Pipswich wrote:Worse, her response was not only rude... she apologized for me being upset, rather than for misrepresenting the items. I usually only go neutral on noobie sellers, but that is a pet peeve. Please don't ever apologize for me being upset that you snookered me. That just doesn't go over well. She got a negative and a couple of ones for BEING IGNORANT. C'est la vie.
Pipswich wrote:What difference does it make that it was still a good deal?She did not ship what she described and illustrated.People use stock photos all the time, I have absolutely no issue with that if the item is in the condition described and what is sold is actually the item photographed. This stuff is mass produced, if it saves a seller 5 minutes so they can post more d&d for us to buy... more power to them.However, she provided a stock photo of the WRONG book.She did not apologize for her error/mistake.She was rude about it.Ebay is a matter of trust. She can't be trusted. Buying from stock photos should not mean the seller can send us anything with the same title. That's a pig in a poke. Especially, if they are using the valuable first print photos for the listings.[/i]
They were a great buy anyway. Clean and nice inside, etc. However, she appears to have been comfortable using three stock photos... all of the wrong printing. In addition, she is comfortable using stock photos and not noting the splattering on the cover of one of them, which you can see in my photo. In addition, she is not sorry for here error and did not learn from it. Instead, she responded rudely and is sorry that I am disappointed? She indicated no awareness that she had done nothing wrong.\ She left several auctions running that likely have similar issues. This leads me to believe she Without remorse. Will use the wrong photos again. Will not note condition issues that should be noted. These add up to shady to me.
napoleonsdad wrote:I don't know that I would go as far as saying shady. Lazy--yes, ignorant--yes, doesn't care--probably not. Shady, it seems to me, should be reserved for those who are intentionally trying to deceive the buyer. This seller probably wouldn't know a 1st print from a 50th print, nor does she even care.