You don't know the whole story here, so you can not know my side

__________________
ENGINE COSTS ARE " OUT OF SIGHT " .....

Unfortunately, I see a lot of "if" and "it would seem" and "maybes" and other such imprecise words being used as though they are somehow evidential.

To say "...a LOT of sellers on eBay misrepresent..." is a condemnation as an implied shady "willfulness" on the part of sellers who may not represent things as one thinks they should (only a fraction of such cases are intentional misrepresentations). But, I agree that there is nothing wrong with factual representation of events as a reasonable thing but there is no real "reasonable" factual representation of events in this situation. Selective "facts" are what we have been presented with.

It's sad that people dont see why many things should be held in private until at least agreed-to resolutions have been given a chance to be accomplished. It is certainly a bit insensitive in the least and seems to lean toward a lack for basic civil "caring" for others that I don't think was really intend. Having a "right" to know doesn't make it "right" to know. That's what's a major source of the rampant uncivil discourse in the world today...everyone thinks they must know everything and then use it how ever they feel to incite more incivility and lure those who easily leap to the "thrill" of such incitement.

There is simply a LOT of guessing here as to what the seller's side is and throwing all the guessing out as pseudo factual evidence of the seller's nature, character, truthfulness, motivations, etc. It's not productive. To suggest that he somehow has an obligation to come to the forum and present his side may be well-meaning but is not reasonable in the face of suggesting not doing so implies wrongdoing. This isn't a world of guilty-until-proven-innocent...at least not in this hemisphere and this part of the Americas...not yet anyway.

To "think perhaps" one has done something and hold it up as some kind of implied fact is certainly not a position of high certainty that one has done something wrong. "Thinking perhaps" is merely an uncertain guess and to hold it as a supportive position is simply not reasonable. Things are not so simply because one "thinks" they are so.

Yes, there is a point to be made that what the buyer got is NOT what the seller represented. And, yes, the buyer has a legitimate ground for telling others as some appropriate point. But to "pull the trigger" so quickly and so obviously one-sidedly present "facts" in such a manner as to vilify and and "trash" someone AFTER HAVING REACHED A RESOLUTION AGREEMENT is simply malicious whether intended or not. The civil thing to do would be to work things out (to whatever conclusion) and THEN after some reasonable thought, lay out the facts if still felt necessary in a public forum. I'd bet a month's paycheck that if this situation were to have privately been allowed to go to conclusion and given time for thoughtful consideration and THEN presented on a public forum the whole thing would have been much less...malevolent.

I know from selling thousands of items over many years that not everyone is happy with the way things go. But I also know that I have made many friends by NOT instantly going into "attack mode" (or "hostile defense) and sincerely working to make things right. Usually the very first thing I suggest is to immediately give their money back (upon the return of the item, of course). That may not be what happened in this event but you get the point. I get their respect, they get my respect and I gain by them talking well of me and usually having an ongoing seller/buyer relationship with them. They gain by getting more knowledgeable and thoughtful attention from me when they want to deal with me again simply because we worked things out and got to know each other better. You can make lemonade from lemons...you can also make a caustic brew by adding battery acid to lemons.

Yes, sometimes things just "go wrong." That is no excuse to intentionally escalate the issue and incite other people's tendencies toward an uncivil or "gang" mentality to metaphorically sneak up behind the guy and club him on the head.

To say "it seems to me" (there goes that uncertainty again) and then to go on to suggest by clever wording that someone was being irresponsible, or not honest, or not forthright, untruthful, "trying to slip one over", etc., is weak and unjustifiable in lack of verifiable facts. I wouldn't ask anyone to "feel" sorry for someone who willfully made such mistakes or inaccuracies. But we are only human and we all make mistakes.

Saying "sounds like" (there's that uncertainty again) communications haven't been stellar and then say he's "probably not" (uncertainty...again) a "people person" is an unfair assertion. Being that there are two direct parties to this it should be pointed out that both may or may not be "people persons." In this case the only evidence I have by what's being presented on this forum is that "perhaps" (now its my uncertainty) the buyer is not a "people person." And yes, "maybe" (uncertainty) the seller knows he oversold the kit, is embarrassed, fearful, and is trying to "head things off", etc. These are all reactions that any business person SHOULD have when things go wrong and, by all evidence, is working things out (or trying to) with Danny.

To start a reply by stating "There's always SOME subset of folks who want to defend the indefensible no matter what...yada yada" is simple condescension (some would call it insulting) that I would not have expected from you whether intended or not. Yes, we're adults here and all know you were off-handedly addressing me.

---John Pursley

A number of yeas ago...... someone who is QUITE a well known knowledgeable "collector" contacted me about an old unopened kit I had. They wanted SO BAD to add it to their PERSONAL collection. But... they said they could not pay the kind of prices that such a kit would go for. He said he HATED people who drove up the prices of kits.

He talked me into selling him the kit for WAY LESS than it was worth, like say $30. Because he wanted it for his PERSONAL COLLECTION so badly!

A few years later, he bragged about selling THAT SAME KIT kit for HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS. So much for wanting it so badly for his PERSONAL collection , and hating on the people who drove up the prices of kits, when he proved to be one himself (if he had not LIED to me, with how badly he personally wanted it, he'd NEVER have sold that kit!).

Showed me to NEVER let that happen again.

So, it is very IRONIC to hear someone complain on TRF about being ripped off about a kit deal........

- George Gassaway

__________________
Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good.....
NAR# 18723 NAR.org
GeorgesRockets.com
Georges'CancerGoFundMe:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-geo...ay-fight-cancer

Wow, Danny! Just returned from a bit of travel to see this thread apparently spiralling downward! All I asked for was some photos to clarify the situation regarding this transaction. I felt that your comments were at least in part coming from an emotional response. How hard would it be to post a couple of photos?

To be very clear, I never even hinted in my post that you were 'to blame' nor that you were 'the culprit'.

And frankly, now that I've read through the entire thread, I have to agree with John that your comments amount to a 'smear' of Tombatony (the seller) whether that was your intention or not. All this for a guy who gave you a (full?) refund before getting the kit back.

I don't know this seller and, to the best of my knowledge (without going through the feedback for all of my Ebay transactions), I have never had any dealings with him. But there's one thing I know for sure............to this point the seller has not had a chance (or, perhaps, taken the opportunity) to present his side of the story here. He may well not even know that this discussion is going on. We have heard your side only, and as a person who tries to be fair, I'm not about to tar and feather him on the evidence presented to date. So I have to disagree with GH on this one.

Come on, Danny, where is that divine forgiveness? How about giving a stranger a chance?

Sorry, but that's just the way I see it in this case.

Joe

I would have slammed "Tombatony" publicly as well.
SOLIDLY on your side of this still Danny.
The only way to stop this sort of crap is by a public THRASHING.

__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!!

Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't !
Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY.
ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC !

Wow. Must've touched a nerve. Sounds like this guy (seller) is your best friend or something and ANYONE having *ANY* disagreement or having *ANY* discourse about this situation is somehow *WRONG* and therefore not to be tolerated and must be verbally "slapped down".

Don't know what the problem is, and frankly I don't care. I was trying to be equitable about it and give the benefit of the doubt on BOTH sides. Seems you just want to paste anybody daring to talk about this subject or defending someone's right to say when and how they've had a good OR BAD experience with a SELLER as some sort of "bad" thing. Oh well. I guess as a vendor and seller you've had your share of experiences with bad buyers-- I'm not so naive as to think they're not out there, because they certainly are. If you want to look at it SOLELY from the buyer's perspective and go on an on about "innocent until proven guilty" and all this nonsense, well, that's your right and prerogative... I wasn't trying to tar and feather the seller, just presenting the FACT that yes, SOME sellers (and buyers for that matter) are less than truthful in their representation of items, some folks are not honest about the condition it was received in or honest enough to return the object in as good a condition as they got it, and some folks are bad about demanding refunds where none are warranted, or in keeping others money once they've gotten it for substandard or damaged goods. Try all you want, you cannot refute those simple facts-- I've experienced all sorts of nonsense like this in my own life. I guess now you'll say I have no right to even discuss or suggest such things are possible or exist. If so, I find that EXTREMELY sad...

I wasn't trying to tar and feather the seller, just suggesting *possible* explanations of what was going on *based on the evidence presented*, while acknowledging that we haven't heard BOTH sides of the story, although that doesn't preclude the OP from sharing HIS EXPERIENCES as he's had them, nor does it exclude the seller from coming here to share his side of the story should he so choose. Seems from the tone and tenor of your posts on this subject that you're just intent to tar and feather anybody who disagrees with YOUR narrow interpretation of what is "proper" and "right" in this situation. If that's your intent, so be it. You have a right to express your feelings on the situation and I think you've done that very well.

BUT, you certainly haven't convinced me, and probably not many other people here either. Some, to be sure, but certainly not everyone. And ya know what, we have just as much right to OUR opinions on the subject and just as much right to discuss when someone has caused us a bad experience as you do to keep mum about it.

If it bothers you SO much, then WHY are you reading this thread?? Pass it by as "another smear campaign against a defenseless Ebay seller" and move on... Instead, it seems you just want to paste anybody who disagrees with you on this subject as some kind of miscreants out to cause trouble. Sorry you feel that way, but frankly, YOU'RE WRONG.

If you want a "totally controlled" environment where discussions about experiences people have had are STRICTLY controlled, there's a forum for that... it's called TRF. I find it interesting that this is the ONLY thread that you've commented in on the forum in a considerable length of time... I wonder why that is?

At any rate, no disrespect is intended. As I said, you have your right to YOUR opinion, and the OP and *I* have our right to express OURS. Let's just amicably agree to disagree and move on. I certainly hope we're all "mature enough" around here to do that.

Later! OL J R

__________________
The X-87B Cruise Basselope-- THE Ultimate Weapon in the arsenal of Homeland Security and only $52 million per round!