A seller cancels an order that has already been paid for in order to resell it at a higher price.
Do we really want to allow alleged sellers to cancel ongoing auctions or even items already purchased, just to resell them at a higher price? If the world worked like that, it would be anarchy, but not the romantic kind: a world of violence and oppression. Moreover, some admit to selling on different platforms. How can we know if they’re telling the truth? I would ask Ebay to step in, otherwise I’ll delete my account and stop buying. Thanks everyone.
12 comments
heavenwelkin
·3 years agoSince we’re on the subject of thanks, I would also thank the author of the post who was asking for eBay’s intervention.
EBAY HAS STEPPED IN and shared our very same observations / objections.
Let’s thank them for not having limited themselves to leaving just a defamatory negative review leaning toward violence and incitement to hatred, but also for having thought it wise to pile on by publishing this magnificent post.
Later on we’ll check whether, in the meantime, they kept their word and left the eBay platform.
Kind regards.
camillobis
·3 years agoMeanwhile, out of curiosity, I checked your profile... 18 years on ebay and only 186 transactions, all as a buyer and only 4 in the last year ... apparently you don't use the platform much, even though you're such a fervent supporter of it...
heavenwelkin
·3 years agoEvery now and then a user appears out of nowhere who seems to have been around forever (at least that’s the impression I get), and it’s not clear why they would start targeting specific users.
If you need help, try wording your requests on the forum.
If you want to help someone and/or offer some kind of assistance or contribution, try offering your solution.
If you’re here for another reason, please let us know.
Kind regards.
camillobis
·3 years agoNo persecution, believe me.... I'm not “targeting” you
I simply joined some threads on topics that interested me, saw legally incorrect opinions, and thought it was appropriate to give mine too, that's all.
Then I saw they were always yours, I got curious and went to check what kind of Ebay experience you have: I saw that we're both on the same level as simple occasional buyer users, maybe with some difference in legal and judicial expertise/experience.
You ask me for my solution? :
Personally, for quite some time now I've downgraded Ebay to a site only good for small purchases... if some trap from China doesn't reach me, I don't make a big deal out of it, but I definitely wouldn't dare buy a DSLR or the Iphone there ...
Unfortunately Ebay is not just a showcase, it's a site that moves a ton of money... and since as an intermediary (a role for which it takes hefty commissions) it has created rules, sometimes overcomplicated, to ensure the “transparency” and reliability of the parties and the functionality of buying and selling, I expect it to be the first to respect and apply them.
If it created Feedback, it's right that it allows them to be used to warn those who want to buy about the risk that the top seller on the other side is someone used to sending half a brick instead of a PC, if they have already done it at least once, or just an intermediary who orders the items “ready for delivery in Italy” from China only after selling them, and then it would be just as well to buy them directly there for half the price.
I read negative feedback, I don't just count the number, and I judge it for what it's worth: if someone complains that a package took a week to arrive from China, I don't even look at it... if instead many people complain about non-deliveries, wrong goods or return difficulties, I change seller. One user can be a vindictive pain in the ass, 10 or 100 can't.
Ebay therefore IMHO is wrong to remove negative feedback in the presence of clear violations of the rules that have compromised the regular course of the transaction, on either side and when that happens it is right to highlight the “censorship” and not try to justify it with nonsense like “ebay must have had its good reasons”..
Have a good day.
heavenwelkin
·3 years agoIn message number 17 of this thread you explicitly mentioned me, expressing your judgment (you call it opinion) and citing the civil code and Supreme Court rulings.
It isn't necessary to earn a law degree to determine whether a feedback goes against the rules or not.
This thread is about feedback removed by ebay.
If ebay removes them, evidently because they violate the rules, the law, or are not true.
We're not in court before a judge, where technical experts are needed to determine whether there is or isn't a defamation offense.
Kind regards.
camillobis
·3 years agoYou keep being self-referential without getting out of the axiom " if Ebay did it, it had its good reasons".
I don't see what a stance like yours serves if not to play firefighter.
heavenwelkin
·3 years agoThere are people here who work with computers and spend so many hours in front of a screen; in the dead moments, with one click they move from one browser tab to another. I don’t see what there is to judge or argue about even on this point.
As for the rest, I’ll leave it alone because we’re on the eBay forum, where users ask for help with issues related to eBay and people try to give answers based on how eBay works.
We’re not in court (where, by the way, even there a lawyer doesn’t have all that much certainty, since a judge decides by interpreting the law).
Best regards.
heavenwelkin
·3 years agoAs you wrote in your post, we can’t know whether the seller sells elsewhere or not, we can’t know whether he actually sold the item or not.
We can’t know whether he was selling on behalf of someone else who asked him to raise the price.
In any case, this is a seller with only a handful of feedback, probably with little experience.
With these doubts here, I wouldn’t have left negative feedback.
DEFAMATORY NEGATIVE FEEDBACK that goes against the site rules.
At most I would have left neutral feedback, simply writing: Auction won, the seller canceled the sale.
You threaten to close the account if ebay doesn’t intervene? LOL 😎😎
camillobis
·3 years agoI’ve noticed that he often intervenes on issues of defamation and slander, but without having the necessary background.
Before talking nonsense about defamation, go reread how the civil code defines it... or maybe some Supreme Court ruling on the matter.
marioelegio
·3 years agoFantastic legal super-expert!
Defamation is a crime and can never be contemplated by the civil code.
In fact you need to open the penal code and look for art. 595, in paragraph 2 the aggravated form by means of print and the like.....
bye
mario
camillobis
·3 years agoHi. Sorry for the late reply but unlike others, I don’t live on forums.
What you say is absolutely true and for the "defamation" you are right, but aside from the slip, the point I was making does not change one bit: since you mentioned the criminal offense, you also know the conditions under which it applies:
For the purposes of establishing the crime of defamation, it is necessary that the offended person is not present or, at least, that they were not able to perceive the offense.
In the case of feedback, the seller not only sees it, but always has the right to reply, so if anything it is "insult" that is being talked about (which is NOT a criminal offense) and not defamation.
In addition to this, it is necessary:
- that a piece of information damaging the honor and dignity of the victim be communicated to more people;
– that the information itself is not true.
And here we come to the point:
First of all, there has to be INFORMATION.
Neutral or negative feedback in itself reflects the "feeling" one got from that commercial transaction.
We can debate as long as we want whether a personal opinion is or is not information, but the purchase of an item that forced me to waste time in complaints and discussions over nonconformity or blatant unfairness, not acknowledged by the seller until Ebay stepped in, is clearly a negative experience.
If instead in the feedback I clearly write that guy xxx ripped me off because he made me pay shipping for an item by insured or tracked mail, or by courier, and instead sent it to me by regular mail, I am actually giving information.
However, if he does not prove compliant shipping, the information is true and so even in this case there is no defamation, just a smart-ass who needs to be exposed.
The only case in which, as I already wrote, feedback becomes defamatory, besides being useless, is if I generically write that YYY is a thug or a scammer or insult them in some other way.
Writing that shipping times (meaning the time between payment and dispatch) of more than a week were too long does not defame anyone.
marioelegio
·3 years agoUnfortunately you still aren't able to understand the spirit of the law. You can't "call out" anyone in a public forum or in a feedback, even if the person being "called out" had the right to reply.
bye
mario