Let it go.........
Shel Belinkoff wrote: > I remembered your total refund offer, I just didn't recall that you offered > postage as well. But that doesn't change the way you communicated with me, > and that's the real issue here - your rude and abusive method of > communicating, that you accused me of damaging the lens, and that dealing > with you was, for me, an unpleasant experience. > > Yes, you have a pretty good eBay rep, based on the numbers of positive eBay > feedbacks. But if one reads the feedback some interesting patterns emerge. > If one were to check your reaction to negative comments or criticism, > they'd see for themselves something of how you may have communicated with > me. > > While I may not have recalled the exact words you used to describe the > condition of the lens, I do know that you described the lens such that I > believed it to be in good, workable condition, and that it could be placed > on the camera and used without need for repair. Would you say that your > description of the lens, regardless of the words used, "strongly > suggested" such a condition? > > BTW, I cast no "dispersions" upon you. > > Shel > > > > >> [Original Message] >> From: J. C. O'Connell >> > > >> But if you read my posts on the matter >> You would know that it isnt true. By >> His own admission he didn't even remember >> My total refund offer or how the condition >> Was listed. I have a right to complain >> About him as a buyer. He is totally wrong >> On the entire matter and wrong to cast >> Dispersions on me as a seller without >> Giving the truth, the whole truth, and >> Nothing but the truth. Its damaging when >> Its not all that. >> jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >> William Robb >> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 8:24 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tom C" >> Subject: Re: Dealing with eBay vendors. Was: Re: The JCO survey >> >> >> >>> The part Shel left out was, that in the end, the transaction was >>> handled to >>> their mutual satisfaction. >>> >> Define "mutual satisfaction". >> >> If I buy something that is defective out of the box, and I return it to >> the store for an adjustment, it is entirely possible that the >> transaction will not be resolved to my satisfaction. >> If the vendor is abusive, or makes the situation as difficult as >> possible to resolve before resolving it, then there is no mutual >> satisfaction, even if I get a replacement product or refund. >> >> William Robb >> >> >> >> -- >> 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
