Oh, It dawned on me that the conspiracy theorists (and Pipswich bashers, lol) among you would be convinced the first email must have been outrageously rude.  It was certainly frank as I was not pleased and recognized the potential for a switch.  So, with this one posted, you have my entire emails to her about this matter. Enjoy!

First email (second and third/last in previous post).

"I am extremely upset that I did not receive the books in the photos in your auction. The greyhawk in your photo is a different printing and in better condition. The Swords and Spells that you sent is splattered, soiled and also a different printing. The Eldritch Wizardry is a different printing. NONE of the books that you sent me have the price on the bottom as is shown in your photographs. If someone convinced you to sell them the books that I bought then I want you to contact them to have them sent to me. In short, I want what I bought, not what I was sent."

Perhaps I read too much into the splattering, but it's hard not to notice it, or to comment on it in the listing.  Bad photos, bad description, bad packing, items worth significantly less than those illustrated and rude responses...  I promise will always get a negative reaction from me.  Whether the item is a buck or the price of a house, you can bet on it.

Not to stir the pot anymore about this but the seller has lied about where she got the pictures from.  They are not from Wiki which actually lists the print she sent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhawk_%28supplement%29

Instead she actually just took the image from The Acaeum.  If you look closely you can see the slight spine creases match.  The Acaeum page also lists pictures for the other printings (that would match her book) and pricing etc.

EDIT: The Eldritch Wizardry pic is also from The Acaeum and not from Wiki which lists this picture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldritch_Wizardry

bombadil wrote:
Seems to me this is more of a disservice to the collecting community than her behavior.  Such statements reinforce the bloated pricing practices of sellers like T&T and a few others.

Have any of the items other than Greyhawk 1st print sold for $200? Or even close to it? Just curious as the history on here doesn't support it.

Unless you're at the GenCon auction and want the same item as Stratochamp.  Then who knows how high the price will go.  

If the seller had wanted to rip you off she wouldn't have charged you $15 including shipping.

The fact is, she wasn't trying to hurt anyone and a few kind words could have resolved things...possibly very much in your favor.

Seethe all you want.  You didn't give the seller a proper chance to fix the problem and that makes you wrong.  

Then, you tried to burn her here and you got caught.

You look foolish for a reason.

We all make mistakes.  Learn from this one.

Pipswich wrote:/shrug  Enjoy your opinion.

I will know better next time.

OK, I finally read through this whole string on this auction.

I did not have to go very far to get the handle. Here is my take...

Pip ran across - or has a saved search set up for BINs - and hit this auction. He saw those pictures and that price and jumped as fast as he could hit the button. No way he was going to take the time to send a message to see if it was correct.

And why not take a second to check something that looks to good to be true? The opportunity to make a killing was way too high. How about some buyer beware - or as Pip suggests it is the seller's complete responsibility? I don't thnk so and I will get back to that.

So Pip has scored the auction with his quick fingers. But now he has the opportunity to ask the seller if the pictures are representative of the auction. Very easy to send a message saying "I just bought this auction, but on a second look I want to make sure the pictures and description are accurate. I have been looking for these for a while and I am excited about the win."

But no, in Pip's calculating mind he thinks this might tip off the seller that she has been totally screwed because of her ignorance on the subject of D&D collectables. No, it is better to just shut up and let them come in the mail.

Now any time I come across this type of deal I press the BIN button and hold my breath. I am taking a gamble that this to-good-to-be-true deal is exactly that. But I take the chance knowing full well that it might not be true. I took the chance. I am responsible for my bid. But somehow Pip does not seem to accept any responsibility. Simply looking at this seller's feedback and auctions it is clear she has no idea what she is dealing with.
So Pip patiently waits the arrival of his deal of the century. It arrives and it turns out the pictures in the auction are indeed incorrect and he is actually so surprised and shocked that he immediately leaps to the seller fraud stance.

Give me a freaking break. I would be disappointed, too. But I would be laughing about it. Remember, I am the one who took the chance without hesitation that I was on a big score. For $15, it was worth the risk. So I want to cover my bases and I contact the seller and simply say, "Received the books today but they do not match your pictures. What happened?" It is that simple. She responds that she pulled the pictures from somewhere because they looked the same. End of story. Do I neg her? Hell no. That is pure vindictiveness and morally sick. I jumped at the chance to take advantage of her ignorance. I took my chance.

Do I send her a follow up email suggesting she include - in bold - that the pictures are not of the actual item? Definately.

I guess I was foolish...

assuming everyone here expects what is illustrated to arrive.
expecting sellers who blow it to apologize.
failing to anticipate other buyers here would stalk in for super deals.

I will know better next time.

Spare me the sympathy stance. You knew full well what you were doing. This attempt at bullshitting a forum full of collectors is a joke. Take some freaking responsibility. Oh, I am sorry, I know in this new politically correct United States no one is supposed to be responsible for anything they willfully act upon.



Finally, I can say all of this without reservation. I have been down this road. More than once. I have jumped BINs with items that don't even have pictures, or the picture is just a box and I have to hope all the stuff the seller say's is actually in the box is there and complete. But for $15, I am taking that risk. Sometimes I win, sometimes I only barely win. So what. If I am going to bid without asking questions about a vague auction, that is my choice. Been there, done that.



And Pip, you need to man up and send an email to that seller and ask her submit a feedback retraction through ebay. Then you need to retract that neg. That would be the right thing to do.

bbarsh wrote:
Spare me the sympathy stance. You knew full well what you were doing. This attempt at bullshitting a forum full of collectors is a joke. Take some freaking responsibility. Oh, I am sorry, I know in this new politically correct United States no one is supposed to be responsible for anything they willfully act upon.

Finally, I can say all of this without reservation. I have been down this road. More than once. I have jumped BINs with items that don't even have pictures, or the picture is just a box and I have to hope all the stuff the seller say's is actually in the box is there and complete. But for $15, I am taking that risk. Sometimes I win, sometimes I only barely win. So what. If I am going to bid without asking questions about a vague auction, that is my choice. Been there, done that.

And Pip, you need to man up and send an email to that seller and ask her submit a feedback retraction through ebay. Then you need to retract that neg. That would be the right thing to do.

Bill, does double damage with the Clue Stick.  



Pip, the onus must lie with the buyer.  I don't think what was stated above can be said any better.

Taking a break from Pip's moral connundrums.......



I recently did a BIN on one of the recent R/RPGA series auctions run on ebay. The buy was NOT for me, but for a Italian Acaeum member (doing a buddy a favor).  The item arrived quickly and packaged well...so well I didn't even undo the packaging, I was simply going to put the envelope in a box and send it on to Italy.



Then yesterday I get this....

I sent you the wrong item (to the aid of falx) instead of (the egg of the phoenix) by mistake! Please return it and as soon as I get it Ill send the correct one to you and refund your shipping cost. Sorry for the mix up. They both have similar color covers.

Sure enough I open it, I've overpaid for an R1...

Here's my response. Am I an ass or just over cautious?

I have to tell you I'm very disappointed in this. What is my protection should the module disappear mailing it back to you (I.E., post office loses or damages it)? I'm going to have to ask you for a refund before I mail it back so as to guard against this possibility. I will give you back the money once the correct module is in my hands. I'll also ask you to include my shipping cost when you mail the module back. The refund is very easy to do from the paypal page, I've had to do it before when messing up an order.
The worst aspect of this is that I hadn't even unwrapped it since it was being mailed to a friend in Italy. It is only dumb luck it was not already on it's way overseas.
I do understand problems like this happen because as a seller I've had it occur; however NOT with a $250 item!!!
I have to say as things are now you are looking at a neg and "1's" across the board on DSRs. I hope you can fix this mixup and turn it around. Feel free to contact me via email...

My overly paranoid thinking goes like this:  I ship the item back, it gets lost, and not only do I not have a module but I'm out the money (or at the very least have to go through a long and overdrawn back and forth with paypal to get my refund).  

As a seller, I have to say that I would either refund the money completely, or send the R3 and wait until the buyer had it in his hands before sending back the R1. Is it wrong to expect someone else to do likewise?  To top it off, said seller has this on his auction's boilerplate:

US bidders only. I require payment via Verified Paypal ONLY and will only ship after payment is confirmed. Due to the rarity of this item I highly recommend insurance as I will not be responsible for lost or damaged packages. Check out my feedback and bid with confidence! Good luck and thanks for checking out my listing. I have a number of other rare RPGA modules listed as well so don't pass up this opportunity to own a piece of gaming history.

Can someone who states they are "not responsible" for lost or damaged packages have me trust them if something happens to the package I send back?  My thinking is...no.



Discuss?



Mike B.

Pipswich wrote:Yep, quite a few of you are all lined up for it.

Buyer beware is long obsolete, has it's origins in real estate and should be left at the flea markets and garage sales where it only survives because the value of the transactions do not justify holding people accountable for their word/truth.  Buyer beware holds no water in a documented transaction, a regulated transaction, or on ebay where a buyer beware position would destroy consumer confidence in the site.  Even where the seller to have used the term in the listing, which she did not there is always "exception ... if the seller actively concealed latent defects."

My responsibility is to hit the button and pay.
The seller is responsible for describing properly, shipping properly, charging appropriate shipping/handling and for providing courteous service.  She actively lifted photos, and intentionally or unintentionally concealed both the nature of the product and latent defects.

You are very confused about what is wrong with the world.  In a world of  moral relativism, people dodge responsibility for their actions. The chain of effect her does not start with my leaving feedback, or even my hitting the button.  The actions started when she began lifting photos and continued as she described the material.  Her actions were made actionable when she listed the item for sale, sold it and delivered a different product.  From that point on, everything I did is responsive to a seller who has misrepresented merchandise and it is my right to hold her accountable for her acts.  And, since she committed the acts.... guess what fellas.... within certain parameters it is the BUYERS RIGHT to hold someone accountable in what ever way is negotiated with the seller.  Her actions as a seller were reprehensible and she has been held accountable.  

And, no, I don't email people to ask if they are honest after I buy something from them.... I presume it until they demonstrate otherwise.  That is my right, and it is the way the world should be.  I do not have an obligation to help her figure out how to run a business.  I am collecting... not running a free counseling service for idiot sellers.

Some of you need to take your armchair lawyering to the flea markets where some of the people reading your posts do not know better.

Buyer beware.... lol.  I never understood why attorneys had so much work until I joined this website and found a bunch of extremely bright people so misinformed about basic commercial code law and ethics.  No wonder the courts are clotted up.

Pip;

The short response: Either nut up like a man, or I guarantee you, whatever high moral ground you have taken, you will NOT be taken seriously on this forum at any point in the future. And if you choose to once again edit all your responses, I can also guarantee you that you will be the punch-line for every joke from here until the sun becomes a burnt out cinder in space.  Christ, she REFUNDED YOU!  You've lost whatever small moral high ground you had and are now looking at a very swift John Edwards-like fall that will render all further posts by you irrelevant, if they weren't already.

You are confusing what is "legally correct" with what is "ethically correct".  Should the seller have been held to account? Of course.  Should you have have acted like an ungrateful troll at this? Of course not.  In the parlance of sports, you were a "sore winner", which a sports fan can tell you, is the worst offense (see: New England Patriots fans).

It's why everyone who kills someone in the US isn't immediately put to death. Sometimes the crime is classified by degrees....if I plan and execute the complicated murder of my wife, I'm getting the needle. If I accidentally speed through a neighborhood and run down a jogger, I may only get 5 years.  Even our legal system recognizes intentional vs accidental actions and judge accordingly.  

There are degrees of sin. You may not agree with it and say all murderers deserve death, but the law, and the moral and ethical construct that our society goes by, does not agree.  Likewise someone that inadvertently screwed up a listing (see my dilemma above for someone who has apparantly inadvertently screwed up a sale) should get a little more slack than someone who intentionally tried to rip someone off. I think it's more than clear if the seller was a super-villain they would have charged a price more in line with the pictures shown; the fact they didn't should tip you off the seller is simply lazy and uninformed, and not evil. The fact this distinction has completely escaped you bothers me on a lot of levels.  The more you continue to defend your indefensible behavior the more you become an outlier of this site and lose what little credibility you still have.  

I've learned someting in life.  When I think I'm right, yet everyone else thinks I'm wrong, it's time to perhaps re-evaluate my position and admit I might be acting too harshly (or too leniently as the case may be).

Suck it up and move on.

Mike B.