Ebay dilemma: Should I leave neutral/neg feedback?

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/26/2009 12:48:39 PM
Author: glitterata
Thanks, Karl--feedback gives you only 80 characters total, so I probably can''t fit all that in. If I can''t fit the stuff about several imaging experts'' opinions, should I leave out the accusation of doctored photos?

yes leave it out then.
Just say "there was a crack that wasn''t disclosed but you liked it enough to keep it anyway turning down a full refund."
I didn''t count that characters but that should fit...

 

[glitterata]

Thanks, Karl!

Your suggestion is still way too long, but that''s okay. Despite all appearances, I can write short when I have to.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/26/2009 1:19:40 PM
Author: glitterata
Thanks, Karl!


Your suggestion is still way too long, but that''s okay. Despite all appearances, I can write short when I have to.

lol ok...
crack not disclosed, kept it, was offered refund

 

[glitterata]

Well, I did it. I left her neutral feedback. I was pretty gentle--I said, "Damage misrepresented (crack & chip), refund offered. I loved & kept it anyway." This didn''t affect her 100% rating, though. I thought neutrals counted against positives, but apparently not. Apparently only negatives lower the percentage.

The feedback a couple before mine was positive, but all it said was "nice." I looked at that item. It was a cameo, and the photo clearly showed a sheaf of cracks in it. Her description said it was in "excellent condition, no flaws or damage," and the fine print noted "A beautiful piece, no dents or damage to the gold or to the cameo, though you can see a very light natural line or two just above the bow." I bet the buyer noticed the cracks and wasn''t too happy. That''s just speculation, of course. At least the seller didn''t photoshop the cracks out in that one! Anyway, that made me feel better about leaving less-than-positive feedback.

Now that it''s all over, I''ll post a photo of my piece.

 

[glitterata]

Here it is. I chose a photo where the chip and the crack are clearly visible.

I believe it''s painted on a thin slice of ivory, because these miniatures usually were and because it cracked, which paper or card wouldn''t do. (The seller claimed it was painted on card; I think ebay now forbids the sale of ivory, even legally imported antiques, which would give her a motive to tell that particular lie.)

The grass at the bottom is made of snippets of hair.

In the motto, "faster" is used in the sense of "more tightly, more securely."

 

[glitterata]

And here''s my anniversary ring from my husband, from the same period (late 18 C to early 19 C). You can see why I had to have the pendant!

 

[winternight]

Both of those are beautiful pieces. I think you did the right thing, and I hope the crack doesn''t take one ounce of joy from your owning the piece. I love the saying on the pendant, so romantic.

 

[glitterata]

Well, the seller responded to my neutral feedback by--of course--blaming me!! Creep.

Here's my comment, which I left as a neutral and I think was pretty gentle, all things considered:

"Damage misrepresented (crack & chip), refund offered. I loved & kept it anyway."

And here's her response:

"The item is shown very clearly. Sometimes a buyer just won't be satisfied."

Not a word about her "mistakes" (more like deception) in the description, her denials that the chip was a chip and the crack was a crack. She's acting like it's MY FAULT for taking her lies at face value!! That really speaks to her character.

I wasn't really all that angry before, but I am now.

The seller's ID is antiquesuncommontreasure . I advise everyone to avoid this dishonest seller.

 

[Steel]

Date: 1/26/2009 6:30:30 PM
Author: glitterata
Well, the seller responded to my neutral feedback by--of course--blaming me!! Creep.

Here''s my comment, which I left as a neutral and I think was pretty gentle, all things considered:

''Damage misrepresented (crack & chip), refund offered. I loved & kept it anyway.''

And here''s her response:

''The item is shown very clearly. Sometimes a buyer just won''t be satisfied.''

Not a word about her ''mistakes'' (more like deception) in the description, her denials that the chip was a chip and the crack was a crack. She''s acting like it''s MY FAULT for taking her lies at face value!! That really speaks to her character.

I wasn''t really all that angry before, but I am now.

The seller''s ID is antiquesuncommontreasure . I advise everyone to avoid this dishonest seller.

I have lurked on this thread and felt you were very considered in your response. You behaved very well in the face of sneaky misrepresentation. You now have a beautifully complimentary pendant and this seller has egg over their PS face. Ha ha. They messed with the wrong Ps''er. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[coatimundi_org]

Date: 1/26/2009 6:30:30 PM
Author: glitterata
Well, the seller responded to my neutral feedback by--of course--blaming me!! Creep.


Here's my comment, which I left as a neutral and I think was pretty gentle, all things considered:


'Damage misrepresented (crack & chip), refund offered. I loved & kept it anyway.'


And here's her response:


'The item is shown very clearly. Sometimes a buyer just won't be satisfied.'


Not a word about her 'mistakes' (more like deception) in the description, her denials that the chip was a chip and the crack was a crack. She's acting like it's MY FAULT for taking her lies at face value!! That really speaks to her character.


I wasn't really all that angry before, but I am now.


The seller's ID is antiquesuncommontreasure . I advise everyone to avoid this dishonest seller.

First--both the ring and pendant are lovely.

Ok, wow. You gave her a neutral on a clearly misrepresented (doctored photo) piece. And that is how she responds to your feedback?? Shady all around. You didn't even let people know that the photo was doctored--specifically. I would be angry too. Thanks for posting her info. Sorry G.

 

[glitterata]

Thank you, Steel & Coati. I hope this thread will show up if people do searches on her ID. And I hope my neutral feedback will encourage other unhappy customers to speak up.

Now I kinda wish I had left a negative. Oh well.

 

[purrfectpear]

I don''t mean to ignore the seller''s comments to the contrary, but based on the listing you posted and the clarity of her pictures, how could you think it was anything other than a chip? I mean to me it''s REALLY, REALLY obvious that that is a chip. It doesn''t require any question to the seller, or better photos for me to see it''s clearly chipped (17" laptop screen).

If you guys see photoshopping, I guess I''m missing it. It''s a very obvious chip. I don''t see it as any differently than seeing an obviously chipped girdle and having a seller say "it''s an artifact of my photo". If I see a chip, I''m going to bid based on the chip. If it does turn out to be an artifact, then bonus for me.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 1/26/2009 8:28:36 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I don't mean to ignore the seller's comments to the contrary, but based on the listing you posted and the clarity of her pictures, how could you think it was anything other than a chip? I mean to me it's REALLY, REALLY obvious that that is a chip. It doesn't require any question to the seller, or better photos for me to see it's clearly chipped (17' laptop screen).

If you guys see photoshopping, I guess I'm missing it. It's a very obvious chip. I don't see it as any differently than seeing an obviously chipped girdle and having a seller say 'it's an artifact of my photo'. If I see a chip, I'm going to bid based on the chip. If it does turn out to be an artifact, then bonus for me.

PP, it wasn't the chip but the crack that was photoshopped......




Glitter, if that were me I would post a follow-up to my neutral with a "warning" type message. Are you able to do that?
You were very measured and fair in your response.

 

[purrfectpear]

Doh, I didn''t even see a crack since the chip was so glaring.

 

[crown1]

i am sorry that the circumstances of the transaction were distasteful but i am envious of your pieces. they are truly lovely and so meaningful to you. i love the quote and scene. the two surely will compliment one another.

 

[glitterata]

Pear, as Arjuna says, it was the crack that was photoshopped, not the chip. The chip she just lied about.

Why did I believe her? Well, I didn''t exactly *believe* her, but I fell for her 100% positive feedback. I looked at that chip in the photos, and I thought, "Hey, that looks like a chip." But then I read the description that said explicitly that what looked like a chip in the photos was in fact not a chip but a moisture mark. I thought, "Okay, she has it in her hands and I''m only looking at photos. It would be idiotic for her to lie and say it''s not a chip if it is, because the buyer will return it and leave bad feedback. Besides, every other buyer for years has said she''s honest, so I''ll give her the benefit of the doubt."

More fool I.

I don''t think I can respond to her response to my feedback, Arjuna, and I don''t think I would even if I could. I don''t want to get into an "I did not! You did too! No I didn''t! Yes you did!" thing--I don''t think that would help buyers figure out who''s right. Especially since she has 5000+ positive feedbacks to my piddling 180+. But I think my feedback sounded pretty measured and generous, so careful readers might be able to figure out that it wasn''t left by someone who''s "never satisfied." After all, I did say I loved the piece and kept it! So how "never satisfied" could I be?

What a fascinating study this has been in the psychology of a cheat! She was still insisting up to her last email that nobody had photoshopped the images. I think my favorite part was her LYING about having no neg or neutral feedback from buyers as a way of trying to get me to believe her OTHER LIES. And when I called her on it, she kept explaining why the other sellers who left her neutrals were wrong, as if that was the point. She''d told me she had received no neutrals, not that she had received a few neutrals but felt those buyers were wrong.

I wonder whether she believes her own lies. Maybe she thinks of herself as honest, so she defines everything she does, even lying, as honesty.

Whatever. I''m just glad I don''t have to deal with her in real life.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

She made a huge error responding to you that way. When I see a vindictive response like that, it tells me a LOT about the person''s character. If she had been gracious and said something like "inadvertant mistake, very sorry but glad you love the item!" then I would have considered giving her another chance.

 

[VRBeauty]

Glitterata: I think you did the right thing -- you left fair (more than fair) feedback, and let other potential buyers know that they should be particularly careful when considering a purchase from this vendor. As an ebay "frequent shopper," I know how hard that can be, so... Congratulations!

I'll take a lesson from you as I deal with my situation.

ETA that pendant is just precious! Congrats on your purchase as well.

 

[Imdanny]

Oh my goodness, don''t ruin the woman''s 5000 perfect feedback record over this. If it was an honest mistake, it was an honest mistake. She offered to give you your money back. If you don''t like what you paid for it, you don''t have to keep it.

 

[Imdanny]

double post

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 1/26/2009 1:53:24 PM
Author: glitterata
Well, I did it. I left her neutral feedback. I was pretty gentle--I said, ''Damage misrepresented (crack & chip), refund offered. I loved & kept it anyway.'' This didn''t affect her 100% rating, though. I thought neutrals counted against positives, but apparently not. Apparently only negatives lower the percentage.


The feedback a couple before mine was positive, but all it said was ''nice.'' I looked at that item. It was a cameo, and the photo clearly showed a sheaf of cracks in it. Her description said it was in ''excellent condition, no flaws or damage,'' and the fine print noted ''A beautiful piece, no dents or damage to the gold or to the cameo, though you can see a very light natural line or two just above the bow.'' I bet the buyer noticed the cracks and wasn''t too happy. That''s just speculation, of course. At least the seller didn''t photoshop the cracks out in that one! Anyway, that made me feel better about leaving less-than-positive feedback.


Now that it''s all over, I''ll post a photo of my piece.

Good.

 

[Imdanny]

Wow, I think you're reading way to much into all this. Is this fun for you? If it's not, why spend so much time and energy on it? Didn't one of her photos show all the cracks? In any case, didn't you have the option of a 100% refund? Please enjoy the piece. It's beautiful and this woman isn't a part of your RL.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 1/26/2009 10:23:24 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
She made a huge error responding to you that way. When I see a vindictive response like that, it tells me a LOT about the person's character. If she had been gracious and said something like 'inadvertant mistake, very sorry but glad you love the item!' then I would have considered giving her another chance.

Ditto - when I see a vindictive response to a fair f/back, its a huge turn off.
Glitter, I can understand why you wouldn't want to respond any further, and I agree with your reasons.




Imdanny - I suggest you read the thread a lil closer - this woman was purposefully deceptive (repeatedly) - there is no "honest mistake" here.
I agree that many of us, me included, may not have given this decision as much thought as Glitterata did - but so what I say? Everyone is different, there's no need to criticize her methods.
Imho, it has been an interesting discussion.

 

[blastdoor]

I agree with VRBeauty... well done glitterata...

its not what you eventually feedback.. its the effort (and not to mention the agony) you went through trying to decide what''s the right thing to do in order to be fair to both the seller as well as any future buyers...

at the end of the day, you''ve showed your character and she''s showed hers... i think any reader with any common sense will be able to tell who''s who..

congratulations...

 

[RBD hunter]

glitterata
Now that I have gone back and looked at the ebay listing.
200 year old piece (Now I understand why there are not more of them around)
I read the sellers listing, looked at all the pictures and YES clearly the seller misleaded you.
I'm not into the them so
I would have sent it back,but chances are you would not come across another in any condition.
it would have been an easier decision, If you didn't love it so much.
Good find you have one now, Good luck and enjoy it.

 

[glitterata]

Everybody, thank you for your thoughtful comments, whether you agreed with me or not. You were all so helpful!

Maybe I took this too seriously, but hey, at least I didn't take it too lightly.

It's over now, and I'm very happy with my pendant.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/27/2009 11:30:15 AM
Author: glitterata
Everybody, thank you for your thoughtful comments, whether you agreed with me or not. You were all so helpful!


Maybe I took this too seriously, but hey, at least I didn''t take it too lightly.


It''s over now, and I''m very happy with my pendant.

Wear it in great health and may it bring you much happyness!!!

 

[Imdanny]

You did the right thing IMO, even if the other person did the wrong thing. I think that''s great. Sellers hate neutral feedback. I think that''s punishment enough. She certainly seemed to think so.

 

[chrono]

It''s a very beautiful and romantic piece that is a wonderful pair to the anniversary ring. Well, as much as I hate how the vendor treated you, I hope you''ll enjoy it without remembering what a mess it was to purchase it.

 

[Rhea]

When I go through a seller''s feedback I read the comments, including the responses, and when possible follow the link to the listing and look for myself. I also usually check out the feedback left of buyers who left a negative or neutral so I can find out if I think that person is a typically reasonable buyer or not.

Her response to your neutral was unprofessional.