Wednesday, August 17, 2005


Following up on the bidder who bailed on the auction while accusing me of fraud & extortion. It looks like he made another bid at the same time.

The most interesting part of this to me is why he wanted out of the auction. I already determined that his emails were bulls***, in the technical sense. The goal was to simply to throw out extreme accusations so i wouldn't press the issue, not to describe any reality. A lie, while untrue, is grounded in some reality. But BS is not. So figuring out the motivation is harder...

I wonder if the guy simply overbid his spending limit and needed to get out of one of the auctions. There is a lag on the auctions; he got the other one first. So maybe not. It is interesting to note that the purple wheels indicate the dude has questionable taste anyway.

Monday, August 15, 2005


I sell quite a bit on eBay. It's actually a good research tool for figuring out how many people are aware of Axley and also for getting rid of stuff.

Anyway, I was auctioning off a pair of Raptors. At the last minute this dude comes in and buys them. Nothing too unusual. But then I get this email:

These are not made by Rudy misrepresented these sunglases...I will not pay for fraud.

All i can say is.. THE HELL??? I wonder if he even knows what fraud means. There was no trickery here. I never said they were Rudy Projects. I did use a common technique in the title of including similar brands to improve searchability. But the brands (Rudy Project and Oakley) are tagged at the end specifically not to imply these were either Rudy Project or Oakley. Further, if someone somehow read it that way, how could someone think they are Rudy Projects and not Oakley's? It doesn't make sense. To me the only way someone would be able to read the title and come to the conclusion they are Rudy Projects is if they had no real knowledge of eyewear which case why would they be looking for Rudy Project to begin with. As they say, the statement does not compute. (Keep in mind Oakley & Rudy Project are mentioned in the title only at the end and the description mentions the brand as Axley 7 times. The picture has a very clear Axley brand label in the lens and there is an Axley logo tag hanging on it). Given the aggresive nature of the initial email, it clear the guy didn't read the description or has some other agenda and is lying about it by trying to claim I tricked him. The capper is that I have a 7 day return policy which he would have known about if he read the auction.

So I responded thus:
That has got to be the complete lamest email I've ever read. This isn't even close to fraud, it doesn't say anywhere in the description that the item is made by Rudy Project. Tags are commonly used to help identify like items, and it is not a misrepresentation as being Rudy Project eyewear. If you had simply said "hey, I didn't read the auction clearly" I would have let you out of the auction, since we have a 7 day return policy anyway.

What I can't abide by is someone who makes a mistake and instead of owning up to it, tries to accuse someone else of being dishonest. As a result, rather than simply letting you off the hook I am going to file a non-paying bidder alert with eBay. This can result in your account being suspended. Either way, if I am not paid with 3 days and recieve an apology from you I will also file negative feedback.

All of which I think was fair.

So then he sends this emails:
Now sounds like you are trying to extort me. You do what you think you need to do...This street runs both ways....

Wow. Now I am extorting him. For the record extortion requires the threat of violence or some act that will harm the other person. I certainly didn;t trheaten violence. I guess it all depends on your definition of harm. Since the only thing I threatened to do if he didn't pay was leave negative feedback (I told him i was going to file an unpaid bidder alert independent of anything else.. payment would simply have made that moot)I can only assume he values the feedback very much.

As much as I'd like to get into the definition of words with him, clearly it's not worth it. They don't have meaning for him. In fact, in that sense he's not lying. He isn't rying to claim I was fraudlent or an extortionist. He's just Bullshitting, in the technical sense: making hyperbolic statements that are designed for an itended effect (to get me to let him out of the bid) not to reflect reality (that he committed to a purchase and for whatever reason doesn't want to follow through). He just uses them to avoid responsibility. Of course the furstrating part is that a real lie is grounded in reality, and gives some hints of the truth. I would be interested to know why exactly did he bid on the eywear? The topper is that his email is which is a pro-bush rightwing website. Nice. The responsibility crowd strikes again.