What the hell makes you think that this
Ebay deal years ago was even remotely
Similar to the vulgar trading of posts this
Last week on the list regarding
The aperture cam sensor. It wasn't
Of course.

I suggest you shut the hell up
Because for you to defend someone
Who did what he did after voluntarily
Choosing to NOT get a full and complete
Refund is inexcusable. He cant 
Choose to keep it and say he's not
Satisfied. If he wasn't satisfied
With that conclusion then why
Did he take that option? Because he
Wanted that lens and that
conclusion in that situation, that's why. Sure Im
sure he would rather had no
issues at all ( so would I )
but a complete reversal offer
is fair as it possibly gets. What do you
suggest, a double his money back
offer or what?

Its just pure bullshit for him
To say I abused him, I caused
His satifaction problems etc, when I did
Everything possible for him
Including giving a full reversal/refund offer
Even though I disagreed with him on the
Whole matter to begin with. I suggest
You see my complete feedback at ebay
And don't judge me by one sick puppy
Which is what he is to do what he did
In his half-truth post( aka : a lie ) to the list
about his claim of me being abusive
or not worthy of dealing with.  

jco


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
John Forbes
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 4:37 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:15:06 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> John,
>
> We all know how JCO has responded to the thread regarding the aperture
> simulator. I'm not saying his response is/was correct.
>
> After the last several weeks, the list certainly did not *need*  
> additional
> examples to understand how JCO may handle himself when there is a  
> dispute.
>
> Shel wrote:
>
> "When I bought the K50/1.4 from you on eBay, and told you the front  
> element
> was lose, you replied with a challenging, abusive email.  Of course,
I'll
> never do business with you again."
>
> The part Shel left out was, that in the end, the transaction was
handled  
> to
> their mutual satisfaction.

I disagree.  Shel was not satisfied.  If he was, he would not say he
would  
never deal with JCO again.

John

By recounting this event to the list,
> *leaving
> out pertinent information*, and then ending with the *never do
business
> again* comment, Shel gave the impression that JCO was a bad e-bay
vendor  
> and
> that he somehow got ripped off, when that was not the case.
>
> Whether Shel deliberately left this information out, one can only
wonder.
> The effect it had though was to call into question JCO's reputation as
a
> vendor, when his being a vendor was NEVER EVER the subject.  A dispute

> that
> was resolved in a satisfactory manner should be moot.
>
> We also don't know how Shel approached the situation when he felt he
> received damaged goods.  Possibly his approach provoked a less than
> desirable response from JCO.  In the years on this list I've observed

> Shel's
> words to be less than gracious sometimes.   It's a human failing we
all  
> fall
> prey to.

I agree.  Shel isn't the most diplomatic person on the list.  But at his

worst he is much better than JCO at his best.

John

>
> So did Shel innocently make the remark to point out *just one more
time*
> that JCO may respond badly or to lob a bomb over the wall?
>
> See how my words cast aspersions as well?
>
> Tom C.
>
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey
> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 14:31:30 -0400
>
>
> What's damaging about it, Tom?   As far as I can see all that
> Shel did was to suggest that JCOs dispute resolution style was
> to respond with abusive email.  Judging by the way he responds
> on this list to anyone who dares to disagree with him I don't
> find that claim in any way unbelievable.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 11:27:26AM -0600, Tom C wrote:
>  > I now read all messages from JCO or containing the characters JCO
out  
> of
> my
>  > junk mail folder.  It means I don't have to worry about deleting
them
> from
>  > the inbox.
>  >
>  > However, I would be a little torqued as well at this kind of
damaging
>  > remark, especially when the deal had been consumated to both
parties
>  > satisfaction.
>  >
>  > Tom C.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ----Original Message Follows----
>  > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
>  > To: [email protected]
>  > Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey
>  > Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:02:37 EDT
>  >
>  > In a message dated 10/24/2006 9:51:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>  > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  > JCO is an eBay vendor. Vendor reputations are based not only on the
>  > product they sell, but how they deal with customer service issues.
If  
> a
>  > vedor treats his custmers like crap ( I am presuming Shel is being
>  > truthful based on JCO's conduct on list), then he has every right
(and
>  > perhaps a duty to warn his friends) to tell the world he was badly
>  > treated.
>  >
>  > William Robb
>  > ========
>  > Personally, I don't think things shared in private email should be

> shared
> on
>  > list. It's a basic no-no in Net Etiquette. And I know Shel one time
> shared
>  > something we had discussed in person, and I thought in private, on

> list,
> and
>  > I
>  > didn't appreciate it at all.
>  >
>  > We are getting along pretty well now, so don't take this too  
> personally,
>  > Shel. And I don't want to rehash it either.
>  >
>  > But I think JCO has a perfect right to be thoroughly pissed off.
> Regardless
>  > regardless of the content of what was shared privately between
them.
>  >
>  > Marnie aka Doe
>  >
>  > --
>  > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>  > [email protected]
>  > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>  > [email protected]
>  > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> [email protected]
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>
>
>



-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to