more eBay thinking

[valis2]

At this point I'm nearly convinced that the "inaccuracy" the buyer was speaking of was actually something else entirely. Upon investigating, I realized that the description for the product in question contained an industry term which is not incredibly common, but still should set off red flags. I didn't define said term--I don't think I ever have. The photo for the product clearly shows what the term means.

I think what happened is that the buyer had no idea what it meant, and didn't realize what it was, exactly, until they received it, and now has no use for it. So I'm being penalized for their failure to get a term defined.

I've tried to think of an analogy. Here's one that pops into my head:

Say you're looking to buy some silver JFK half-dollars. The only year silver JFKs were made was in 1964, so you bid on a JFK from that year. The description says "clad coinage," and you don't know what that means.

You get it home and realize it looks coppery on the edge. A little research and you realize that it's not silver at all, but a modern mix of copper and zinc and worthless materials called "clad coinage." Useless for your purposes, as it's not a silver JFK at all.

You realize that other sellers have explained "clad coinage" in their descriptions, but not this one, so clearly it's the seller's fault for not defining the term.

FAIL.

*grumbles, and goes to edit listings*

Comments

[valis2.livejournal.com]

Yeah, in my universe, it's a lesson learnt and the price was the money I spent. But obviously they are different--they feel the need to penalize people for their own shortcomings. lol