Pointless debate.
The seller can sell to whomever pleases him and doesn't need to defend his choice.
true but that should be stated in the add.
I have posted adds saying that local buyer prefered.
No it shouldn't. The buyer owes the seller two things: money, and an honest evaluation of the received goods.This should be the law.
No it shouldn't. The seller owes the buyer two things: money, and an honest evaluation of the received goods.
A:
B: To those who think that the Ebay Feedback way is the right way...I call B.S. That only gives the buyer the option to leave a positive feedback for fear that they will receive a Negative feedback for leaving a Negative feedback. I have done it this way here but not to hold a gun to the buyers head, only to make sure they were happy with the purchase, and if they were not, I would have given a refund and (as stated above) the transaction would have never taken place as far as anyone else was concerned.
I believe Ebay (for one) should change their policy to have the seller rate first. If the buyer held up his/her end of the bargain by paying promptly then they should not be in fear of receiving a negative feedback. Of course, this is a topic more suited to a diffrerent part of the forums.
I prefer for the buyer to rate first. That way, if there is a problem that can't be rectified, a refund will be in order for a deal that never took place.
Pointless debate.
The seller can sell to whomever pleases him and doesn't need to defend his choice.
Yes, you are quite correct. Ethics has NOTHING to do with it; however, a Pox on the house of those who increase the sellers asking price to leap-frog over the first "I will take it" - These are Dirty little f**kers with ZERO moral character: Both the guy who jerks-over his fellow nutter and and the seller who accepts the Vulchers offer. Real do-gooders whose Mothers should be proud of them.![]()
Ummm
Just checking.....
We do all know that Canada has time zones right?