Locked
Discussion interactions are currently paused.
"Used condition" in the description, a new fad?
Summary: rollerboall initiates a discussion about the growing trend of using the condition 'used' in descriptions, seeking opinions and insights. The thread includes responses from multiple participants, although specific details or outcomes from the discussion are not provided.
But have people gotten dumb?
Here on Ebay I mainly deal with buying and selling computer products, and for some time now, as it’s grown, I’ve noticed that sellers write in the description, ''used condition''; at first, obviously, I didn’t pay it any mind, but now I’m realizing that it’s becoming the norm. This makes me think two things: the first is that people are stupid, you select ''condition'' from the drop-down menu when posting, there’s no need to repeat it, especially while omitting to write what the actual condition of the used item is! The second is, are people really such sheep that they repeat like parrots what they see others doing? I can’t explain the widespread use of what I’ve described in any other way; this insignificant detail, if you want, confirms to me how dangerous the masses are.
kh-tuna
·5 months agoHello everyone,
Since this discussion is too old, it has been closed to further replies. Feel free to open a new discussion if you’d like to continue talking about this topic.
Thanks for understanding.
ciulabadula
·5 months agoand the current one that's in circulation
but there are worse things
like, for example, reporting items that are clearly used but sold as NEW, and the report is promptly ignored by eBay (something that is anything but correct)
at that point you might as well remove the item condition wording
heavenwelkin
·5 months agoFrom the feedback you leave, I’m not sure it’s the case to focus on other people’s quotient.....
In my opinion ebay has DONE DAMAGE by leaving all these characters available to users.
Rather than feedback, you’re leaving reviews (I suggest you look into the difference)
Besides, some positive ones have negative content and wouldn’t be compliant.
And several other feedbacks wouldn’t be compliant.
On users’ requests, many feedbacks could be removed....
I suggest you read more about it starting from here:
https://www.ebay.it/help/policies/feedback-policies/regole-sui-feedback?id=4208
To answer the question about reports that are not taken into consideration by ebay, I’ll tell you right away that ebay filters certain users based on its algorithms.
So obsessive / compulsive behavior would certainly harm the platform’s users.
But then I’d like to understand what an uninterested user cares if someone sells a used item claiming it’s new.
If it’s not in the user’s direct interest, what’s the point?
If a user notices from the photos that it’s not NEW, they simply move on....
Kind regards.
mocer-75
·6 years agoWell, personally I definitely find the tricksters who sell electronic goods worse, and in the condition they select the used option (Used: An item that has been used. An item with some signs of wear due to use but in good working order. This item may have been used as a display model in the store or purchased and then returned to the seller.
See the seller's listing for more details and the description of any imperfections.), then you go read the description and find the same old nonsense: removed from a working PC but left on a shelf for a long time, therefore sold as untested.
Personally I avoid buying from such people, but if it ever happened to me and they were to send me a decorative item, I'd file a dispute straight away.
Either you sell it to me as used and working as the description says, or you sell it to me as not working; it's too easy to have it both ways 😉
moriadellevacche
·6 years agoI agree, those who use the phrase "to be tested" are the worst.
To suggest that an item might be working when they probably already know it doesn't work and that, if anything, it's only good for the dump.
Bye
albertpittin_0
·1 year agoBrilliant, actually writing "to be tested" is really sneaky
pollo_bionico
·1 year agoReplying to a discussion from 6 years ago is not exactly clever, actually.....