Nominating DavidtheDavid 1 1

[DavidTheDavid]

13 minutes ago, wombat said:

I completely agree. If the seller at that point would have said no I would lean towards that begin a done deal. But by the seller's own action they made it "not a done deal" and opened it back up. Personally I judge both parties "change of mind" as being equal no matter which one happened first. 

But it does. He accepted my new information, made a clear indication to return the book for a refund, and then backed off. Events happen sequentially.

[Mxwll Smrt]

2 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I really don't know how judgement can be passed as to where the damage happened. I'm not clear on the showing the book to Vincent part. Did Vincent review the book in hand ? Was this after the scans were taken ?  To me, the question is when is a deal completed. The book was received by the buyer and he communicated his satisfaction with the book. IMO, that should be the end of any liability for the seller. 

No, Vincent didn't have the book in hand. 

[Mxwll Smrt]

2 hours ago, entalmighty1 said:

I don't understand jumping from "Okay, send it back, no problem" to "YOU'RE FULL OF IT, YOU DID SOMETHING TO THE BOOK" in the amount of time that passed.  I understand being upset about damage to a book, but that's certainly not going to help resolve anything.

It's the time difference between when I could really see the scans he sent and realized that it was a con on his part.

[Mxwll Smrt]

59 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Really, people need to consider OP for Probation List as well, if not HOS. He instructed me to return the book for a refund, I did, and here we are. He has jumped to conclusions, made spurious accusations, and is working to damage my reputation on the boards, with his intent clearly indicated in the PMs that I posted.

He could just as easily have sent me a damaged book and now is working to have both the book and the money. That's just as likely a scam as everything he's fabricated so far. Sounds like HOS material to me.

It was a mistake and a knee jerk response to your comment about sending the book in for grading and me paying the difference if it came back lower (see pm's). More importantly though, how come you haven't yet had the ability to comment on your statement "Gorgeous Book....". Seriously to say "He could just as easily have sent me a damaged book and now is working to have both the book and the money" is beyond... you're clearly a new kind of screwed up...

 

[Mxwll Smrt]

1 hour ago, DavidTheDavid said:

But it does. He accepted my new information, made a clear indication to return the book for a refund, and then backed off. Events happen sequentially.

Here's your post on Paypal... the book arrived damaged??? Really?? Everything you're writing is an attempt to CYA. You can't prove the scans or how it arrived because of your comment on the 17th....and my mistake was my knee jerk response to say yes and be a good guy and avoid confrontation and I'm furious that I did that. Let the board decide. When they start asking you why you said what you did maybe you'll actually answer other than deflect.

 

[FineCollector]

Speaking to the damage, the bend is tough to see through the yellow of the front cover.  I daresay the buyer trusted the reputation of the seller, and graded the book through the bag when he issued kudos, just as the seller trusted the reputation of the buyer when offering a return.

Question: what's the difference in value between the 8.5 initially pictured, and the book as it sits with the creased corner?

[Bomber-Bob]

1 hour ago, FineCollector said:

Speaking to the damage, the bend is tough to see through the yellow of the front cover.  I daresay the buyer trusted the reputation of the seller, and graded the book through the bag when he issued kudos, just as the seller trusted the reputation of the buyer when offering a return.

 

Indeed, it's very possible the bag may have hidden the flaw. Upon receipt, the buyer looks at the book in the bag and is happy, makes perfect sense. IMO though, because he replied without careful inspection, the liability is over. I'm pretty sure I've been in similar situations as a buyer, notice a flaw later on but it's my bad. However, I acknowledge the fact that the seller agreed to a return of the book. Something he admits was a mistake and complicates this whole mess.  So, I think we need to hear from the lawyers on the Boards on this one. Seriously, from a legal standpoint, who is in the right here ? 

[Bomber-Bob]

3 hours ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Really, people need to consider OP for Probation List as well, if not HOS. He instructed me to return the book for a refund, I did, and here we are. Sounds like HOS material to me.

James, first off, I apologize that I am leaning toward the seller here. I believe your side of the story and I respect you as a Boardie. I don't think either of you should be in the HOS over this. But IMO, and it is just an opinion, your acceptance of the book takes precedence over the return. Regarding nominating the Seller, I had a similar situation where I was the buyer and upon receiving the books immediately recognized they were overgraded. Since the seller stated he bought the books from Heritage, I looked up the Heritage grades and he indeed overgraded. He agreed to send me another book as compensation. I never got the book and tried to nominate him. The overwhelming consensus was he was guilty of bad service and overgrading but not worthy of a nomination. I think the same logic may apply here.

[wombat]

Split the difference between what the new grade would sell for and the old grade. Both sides made mistakes. 

[DavidTheDavid]

4 minutes ago, wombat said:

Split the difference between what the new grade would sell for and the old grade. Both sides made mistakes. 

That's the direction I was clearly headed, but he wanted a return and refund. So I did that. Considering his tirade based on supposition and calumny, I don't trust him to return the book in good order along with a partial refund. At this point, it's all in for a refund. But really, that's between PayPal, me, and him, and maybe the CC issuer if it goes that far.

This thread is about a nomination, even though we're far from 30 days, for one or both board members.

[Mxwll Smrt]

57 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

That's the direction I was clearly headed, but he wanted a return and refund. So I did that. Considering his tirade based on supposition and calumny, I don't trust him to return the book in good order along with a partial refund. At this point, it's all in for a refund. But really, that's between PayPal, me, and him, and maybe the CC issuer if it goes that far.

This thread is about a nomination, even though we're far from 30 days, for one or both board members.

My experience is what it is. If you feel I  have defamed you, please, by all means have an attorney contact me and I will give him my attorneys information but remember, everything that I'm writing is based upon my experience with you. 

Now,regardless of your mistrust, I won't and wouldn't give you a partial refund because I believe/ believed you're/ were scamming me.

BTW, there are countless boardies scratching their heads saying, "ah, Eric is really easy to deal with WTF happened?"

Now, once again, because you've chosen not to answer and everyone is now noticing, let's address again your failure to explain why you wrote "Gorgeous Book, sir. Really happy to have that in my hands. Looks incredible fresh, doesn't it?"

Let's also address why you've failed to explain what you did or didn't do when you got the book - did you not take it out of the 2 plastic sleeves when you looked at the book or did you?

What's interesting is you offer no explanation for what occurred and evade every chance you get to provide clarity. Most people would believe that if you haven't done so by now there's something pretty deceptive and dishonest.

Edited June 24, 2017 by Mxwll Smrt

[DavidTheDavid]

I've explained my pov. There's really nothing more to add. You've chosen to believe your own conspiracy theories. It's looking more and more like you're up to no good, sliding really hard to not eat a loss.

I'd rather you explain why the book you shipped me does not match the pictures. Did you do that to cover up the damage? Looking more and more like it.

Boardies can decide on probation list and this will have room its course.

[Mxwll Smrt]

2 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

I've explained my pov. There's really nothing more to add. You've chosen to believe your own conspiracy theories. It's looking more and more like you're up to no good, sliding really hard to not eat a loss.

I'd rather you explain why the book you shipped me does not match the pictures. Did you do that to cover up the damage? Looking more and more like it.

Boardies can decide on probation list and this will have room its course.

No, you haven't. You still haven't told the board what happened when you got the book or how it was examined - and you haven't explained why you would write something as you did if it weren't really beautiful (as it was).

Conspiracy theories? Let's call comments like this a "DavidtheDavidisms" - things that sound good but mean nothing. What I've done is been completely transparent, admitted my part and mistake, and what you've done is thrown everything short of the kitchen sink in an effort to not explain the core of why I think you're FOS. 

Your scans and your comment as to "why the book you (I) shipped me does not match the pictures" is simply another weak effort to deflect any accountability. Your scans are of the damaged book that were taken while in your possession - not mine. I did not mail a damaged book. 

Again, the absence of your explanation to the comment on the 17th screams and is what everyone is looking at now. 

[DavidTheDavid]

Don't dodge the question, Eric. If you were being transparent, then you would explain the damage. I'm sorry that you don't understand what I wrote. I advise rereading it when you are not impassioned.

But yes, please explain why you shipped a book that did not match the images, why you requested the book be returned to you, reversed course, and how you intend to make me whole.

[ChiSoxFan]

4 hours ago, FineCollector said:

Speaking to the damage, the bend is tough to see through the yellow of the front cover.  I daresay the buyer trusted the reputation of the seller, and graded the book through the bag when he issued kudos, just as the seller trusted the reputation of the buyer when offering a return.

Trying to see the scans posted here, the bend was very difficult to see at all for me, FWIW.  There have been many instances when, due to my work schedule, I get books in on a regular basis from purchases here just as I'm waking up and have no real time to do much other than open them quickly, then don't get a chance to look them over better until sometimes several days later.  As I've bought from numerous sellers here multiple times, the bolded part of your statement above makes sense on both parts.

3 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Indeed, it's very possible the bag may have hidden the flaw. Upon receipt, the buyer looks at the book in the bag and is happy, makes perfect sense. IMO though, because he replied without careful inspection, the liability is over. I'm pretty sure I've been in similar situations as a buyer, notice a flaw later on but it's my bad. However, I acknowledge the fact that the seller agreed to a return of the book. Something he admits was a mistake and complicates this whole mess.  So, I think we need to hear from the lawyers on the Boards on this one. Seriously, from a legal standpoint, who is in the right here ? 

A transaction in complete, in my eyes, when both boardies agree so.  I've had three "problems" arrive with transactions here (and again, with the sheer volume of purchases I've made here over time, that's almost miraculous in itself.  In one, I actually left kudos for the seller (Ares, I believe it was), then went back a little later the same day to catalog the books on my list, and realized one of the higher-priced ones was actually not even there.  I contacted the seller, who quickly checked and realized they had forgotten to package it.  Problem solved easily enough, but it was brought into this debate how someone "experienced" could miss a flaw -- heck, I missed an entire book, so it can happen, for a myriad of reasons, most of which do not involve trying to run a con.  The second issue came from a group of books damaged beyond repair I got from ft88 (Ed).  When I sent scans and an explanation of what happened, he issued a refund and I sent the books back immediately.  The third was with jbud (Jason) -- I received a large number of books from him in a purchase, then at least a week later, went through and found out that I couldn't find several books from the transaction.  When I contacted him to find out if they were still in his possession, he checked and replied that they wouldn't.  What happened to them?  I might have accidentally thrown them away somehow, but he's a reputable seller and someone I've dealt with numerous times before (and am doing so with again), so my guess is I screwed up somehow on that one. (Edited to add -- all of the three above sellers I referenced above all get my recommendations to deal with, as they all handled the above situations noted professionally, cordially, and to the best of their ability to resolve the issue, and I have dealt with ALL of them with 100% confidence since, as you should as well).

The main thing all three of those instances have in common is that all three of the sellers and I had an initial agreement, and in two of them (the first and last), I acknowledged acceptance of the purchase and my satisfaction with it, but afterward went back and raised a question about a possibly unintentional mistake.  Once the other party agrees to reopen the matter -- in this case, by agreeing to a return -- then the original deal is null and void, IMO.  I sold real estate for a dozen years, and in my state I always told clients about offers and counter-offers that once you change a detail of the original offer (or deal), then it becomes entirely something separate.  If Maxwell Smart had said "No way" to the refund right away, then the matter would have been closed, and DavidtheDavid would frankly, in this case, have no recourse to argue anything otherwise.  "Mistake" or not, once he did agree to the refund, that's a whole new matter.   How people here choose to view not honoring it after agreed upon remains to be seen.

 

1 hour ago, Mxwll Smrt said:

My experience is what it is. If you feel I  have defamed you, please, by all means have an attorney contact me and I will give him my attorneys information but remember, everything that I'm writing is based upon my experience with you. 

Now,regardless of your mistrust, I won't and wouldn't give you a partial refund because I believe/ believed you're/ were scamming me.

BTW, there are countless boardies scratching their heads saying, "ah, Eric is really easy to deal with WTF happened?"

Now, once again, because you've chosen not to answer and everyone is now noticing, let's address again your failure to explain why you wrote "Gorgeous Book, sir. Really happy to have that in my hands. Looks incredible fresh, doesn't it?"

Let's also address why you've failed to explain what you did or didn't do when you got the book - did you not take it out of the 2 plastic sleeves when you looked at the book or did you?

What's interesting is you offer no explanation for what occurred and evade every chance you get to provide clarity. Most people would believe that if you haven't done so by now there's something pretty deceptive and dishonest.

Unless I've missed something, there has been an explanation given -- buyer looked at book quickly, probably through the mylar, got pulled away by work, checked it later, saw a crease and other issues he hadn't noticed on the first glance, and contacted you then.  Again, I've looked at books completely through a mylar and/or bag and missed something I saw in a later examination, so that's not at all unreasonable, neither is letting a person know you're happy before doing so (again, with sellers I've bought from before, I'll often leave kudos/private acknowledgement of satisfaction upon receipt and a quick check to make sure everything is there and nothing looks completely amiss, and I would imagine I'm not the only one, depending on a person's business).

My opinion is that the most likely scenario is that NEITHER person is a scammer in this instance.  A book was shipped that had a defect -- whether it existed before it shipped or not is nothing ANY of us will be able to determine 100% for certain, because none of us were there when the book listed was scanned initially, put up for sale, packaged, shipped, opened, or anything that followed.  It's one person's word versus the others.  I have dealt with James multiple times before on both ends of a transaction with absolutely no issues -- I can't say that I have with Eric, but it's entirely possible due to the sheer volume of business I've done with people here over time.  I can't see either party trying to pull some huge scam when the repercussions -- complete shunning in the sales forums -- would be the result if it were to be proven correct.  One would hope cooler heads would prevail here, but that doesn't look like it's happening.

A last note to Maxwell Smart here -- your comment about "BTW, there are countless boardies scratching their heads saying, '[A]h, Eric is really easy to deal with WTF happened?'" -- well, there are plenty of boardies who I'm sure are saying the same thing, but replacing your name with James'.  I read the PM chain above -- you went very quickly from "Send it back for a refund" to "You're a scam artist and I'm not giving you anything".  If you had accused ME of being a scam artist after all of the above had transpired, to say you'd be getting a heated reply from me would be an understatement.  Your challenge about bringing lawyers into things as well is way over the top and unnecessary (and again, if you'd done so to me, I'm fortunate enough to have multiple lawyer friends who would have been sending your correspondence pro bono).  One of your first comments -- derogatory in tone -- about DavidtheDavid being a "seller and flipper" seems a bit hypocritical since you have 7 pages of topics you've started on this board, the majority of them sales threads, so one could make the same claim about you if one chose to (news flash to everyone -- there's a lot of people who buy and sell a lot here who aren't professional comic dealers, but do so for a myriad of reasons.)  This is an unfortunate situation, and again, as I've already noted, I don't think either of you are looking to scam the other, but you're the one who seemed, in that PM conversation, to escalate the tone from cordial to accusatory, and that raises a lot more red flags to me -- not as to your intention in this case, but as to whether you're as "easy" to deal with as you claim to be.

I hope it gets worked out to everyone's satisfaction, though at this point, that horse looks to have left the barn.  As Bomber-Bob stated, the "new terms" set forth by the seller -- namely, accepting the refund -- changes the original deal.  How that would affect PL nominations, I have no idea (other than, if Maxwell Smart ends up not issuing the refund and DavidtheDavid ends up with the book back in the condition he sent it back for the return), there's absolutely no grounds for a DavidtheDavid spot on the PL, since in essence, the entire original deal would have reverted back to its original state, and any charge of "intentional fraud" -- when they're absolutely zero tangible proof or even circumstantial evidence that any such thing occurred -- would be a ridiculous one and impossible to verify to place anyone on the PL.  Whether or not the counter-nomination to the PL by DavidtheDavid would have weight -- reneging on a agreed upon return -- would be another matter.  My 2 cents -- again, I would hope a more amicable situation would be reached and cooler heads eventually prevail.

Edited June 24, 2017 by ChiSoxFan
Example clarifications and disclaimers

[Bird]

5 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

This is an unfortunate situation, and again, as I've already noted, I don't think either of you are looking to scam the other, but you're the one who seemed, in that PM conversation, to escalate the tone from cordial to accusatory, and that raises a lot more red flags to me -- not as to your intention in this case, but as to whether you're as "easy" to deal with as you claim to be.

BING BING BING! 

 

[Mxwll Smrt]

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

Trying to see the scans posted here, the bend was very difficult to see at all for me, FWIW.  There have been many instances when, due to my work schedule, I get books in on a regular basis from purchases here just as I'm waking up and have no real time to do much other than open them quickly, then don't get a chance to look them over better until sometimes several days later.  As I've bought from numerous sellers here multiple times, the bolded part of your statement above makes sense on both parts.

If there's an explanation by the seller on why he wrote the comment "Gorgeous Book" please let me know where it is. 

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

A transaction in complete, in my eyes, when both boardies agree so.  I've had three "problems" arrive with transactions here (and again, with the sheer volume of purchases I've made here over time, that's almost miraculous in itself.  In one, I actually left kudos for the seller (Ares, I believe it was), then went back a little later the same day to catalog the books on my list, and realized one of the higher-priced ones was actually not even there.  I contacted the seller, who quickly checked and realized they had forgotten to package it.  Problem solved easily enough, but it was brought into this debate how someone "experienced" could miss a flaw -- heck, I missed an entire book, so it can happen, for a myriad of reasons, most of which do not involve trying to run a con.  The second issue came from a group of books damaged beyond repair I got from ft88 (Ed).  When I sent scans and an explanation of what happened, he issued a refund and I sent the books back immediately.  The third was with jbud (Jason) -- I received a large number of books from him in a purchase, then at least a week later, went through and found out that I couldn't find several books from the transaction.  When I contacted him to find out if they were still in his possession, he checked and replied that they wouldn't.  What happened to them?  I might have accidentally thrown them away somehow, but he's a reputable seller and someone I've dealt with numerous times before (and am doing so with again), so my guess is I screwed up somehow on that one. (Edited to add -- all of the three above sellers I referenced above all get my recommendations to deal with, as they all handled the above situations noted professionally, cordially, and to the best of their ability to resolve the issue, and I have dealt with ALL of them with 100% confidence since, as you should as well).

OK.

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

The main thing all three of those instances have in common is that all three of the sellers and I had an initial agreement, and in two of them (the first and last), I acknowledged acceptance of the purchase and my satisfaction with it, but afterward went back and raised a question about a possibly unintentional mistake.  Once the other party agrees to reopen the matter -- in this case, by agreeing to a return -- then the original deal is null and void, IMO.  I sold real estate for a dozen years, and in my state I always told clients about offers and counter-offers that once you change a detail of the original offer (or deal), then it becomes entirely something separate.  If Maxwell Smart had said "No way" to the refund right away, then the matter would have been closed, and DavidtheDavid would frankly, in this case, have no recourse to argue anything otherwise.  "Mistake" or not, once he did agree to the refund, that's a whole new matter.   How people here choose to view not honoring it after agreed upon remains to be seen.

I know I made a mistake - and I was really angry that I didn't take the time to pause and reread the entire head of the transaction and that rather than confront James and straight out say "no way" I acted like a people pleaser and said "send the book back". 

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

 

Unless I've missed something, there has been an explanation given -- buyer looked at book quickly, probably through the mylar, got pulled away by work, checked it later, saw a crease and other issues he hadn't noticed on the first glance, and contacted you then.  Again, I've looked at books completely through a mylar and/or bag and missed something I saw in a later examination, so that's not at all unreasonable, neither is letting a person know you're happy before doing so (again, with sellers I've bought from before, I'll often leave kudos/private acknowledgement of satisfaction upon receipt and a quick check to make sure everything is there and nothing looks completely amiss, and I would imagine I'm not the only one, depending on a person's business).

I think you've missed something because to say "Gorgeous Book, sir. Really happy to have that in my hands. Looks incredible fresh, doesn't it? Do you have a kudos thread?" This statement is expressed - not implied. Nowhere does he express or imply that he took a quick glance. Nowhere does he express or imply anything else than the aforementioned statement.

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

My opinion is that the most likely scenario is that NEITHER person is a scammer in this instance.  A book was shipped that had a defect -- whether it existed before it shipped or not is nothing ANY of us will be able to determine 100% for certain, because none of us were there when the book listed was scanned initially, put up for sale, packaged, shipped, opened, or anything that followed.  It's one person's word versus the others.  I have dealt with James multiple times before on both ends of a transaction with absolutely no issues -- I can't say that I have with Eric, but it's entirely possible due to the sheer volume of business I've done with people here over time.  I can't see either party trying to pull some huge scam when the repercussions -- complete shunning in the sales forums -- would be the result if it were to be proven correct.  One would hope cooler heads would prevail here, but that doesn't look like it's happening.

My only response is that you state "A book was shipped that had a defect". No, I emphatically respond a book was not shipped with a defect - a beautiful book was shipped and that's been my position the entire time. A more proper and true statement is now there is a book with a defect.

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

A last note to Maxwell Smart here -- your comment about "BTW, there are countless boardies scratching their heads saying, '[A]h, Eric is really easy to deal with WTF happened?'" -- well, there are plenty of boardies who I'm sure are saying the same thing, but replacing your name with James'.  I read the PM chain above -- you went very quickly from "Send it back for a refund" to "You're a scam artist and I'm not giving you anything".  If you had accused ME of being a scam artist after all of the above had transpired, to say you'd be getting a heated reply from me would be an understatement.  Your challenge about bringing lawyers into things as well is way over the top and unnecessary (and again, if you'd done so to me, I'm fortunate enough to have multiple lawyer friends who would have been sending your correspondence pro bono).  One of your first comments -- derogatory in tone -- about DavidtheDavid being a "seller and flipper" seems a bit hypocritical since you have 7 pages of topics you've started on this board, the majority of them sales threads, so one could make the same claim about you if one chose to (news flash to everyone -- there's a lot of people who buy and sell a lot here who aren't professional comic dealers, but do so for a myriad of reasons.)  This is an unfortunate situation, and again, as I've already noted, I don't think either of you are looking to scam the other, but you're the one who seemed, in that PM conversation, to escalate the tone from cordial to accusatory, and that raises a lot more red flags to me -- not as to your intention in this case, but as to whether you're as "easy" to deal with as you claim to be.

Let's address something here. The more that I thought about the fact that I didn't simply come out and say BS from the start made me angrier and angrier by the second. The fact that I let one of my biggest defects of character cause the "sure, send it back" makes me sick to my stomach. The fact that boardies like you and several others haven't turned here on the board to James and say "so why did you write Gorgeous book" bothers me as well. I mailed a structurally beautiful book without a crease or damage.  I made the mistake of saying return the book and then regretting it ever since. I get angrier and angrier at James because he continues to duck what I've mentioned before and you should ask him why he wrote such a thing. Lastly, let's address the attorney comment - James was the one who said I defamed him - I just stated it was my experience - a term like that is a veiled threat and I've got a few lawyers - my start up is draining everything but let's be clear - his language was a veiled threat. Why don't you ask him what he meant when he used those terms? 

21 minutes ago, ChiSoxFan said:

I hope it gets worked out to everyone's satisfaction, though at this point, that horse looks to have left the barn.  As Bomber-Bob stated, the "new terms" set forth by the seller -- namely, accepting the refund -- changes the original deal.  How that would affect PL nominations, I have no idea (other than, if Maxwell Smart ends up not issuing the refund and DavidtheDavid ends up with the book back in the condition he sent it back for the return), there's absolutely no grounds for a DavidtheDavid spot on the PL, since in essence, the entire original deal would have reverted back to its original state, and any charge of "intentional fraud" -- when they're absolutely zero tangible proof or even circumstantial evidence that any such thing occurred -- would be a ridiculous one and impossible to verify to place anyone on the PL.  Whether or not the counter-nomination to the PL by DavidtheDavid would have weight -- reneging on a agreed upon return -- would be another matter.  My 2 cents -- again, I would hope a more amicable situation would be reached and cooler heads eventually prevail.

I don't agree with your interpretation. I mailed out a beautiful book. He received the book, responded that it was gorgeous and is now returning a damaged book. That's what the board needs to determine.

That you for your comments.

[Bird]

I think that people have given a reasonable explanation for the gorgeous book comment...he could have given it a quick perusal, possibly through the bag, and just not noticed the defects. As you did with your refund comment, people sometimes go a little far in an effort to be nice. Both of you made statements that you later retracted so I don't think that it is any less plausible than you accepting the return and then changing your mind. In fact it seems more plausible as looking through the bag is a mistake of logic/action and your change of heart is a change based on feeling/anger.

There is no way for the boards to decide who, if anyone, is actively misrepresenting things. You might want to let this one go.

[Mxwll Smrt]

3 minutes ago, Bird said:

I think that people have given a reasonable explanation for the gorgeous book comment...he could have given it a quick perusal, possibly through the bag, and just not noticed the defects. As you did with your refund comment, people sometimes go a little far in an effort to be nice. Both of you made statements that you later retracted so I don't think that it is any less plausible than you accepting the return and then changing your mind. In fact it seems more plausible as looking through the bag is a mistake of logic/action and your change of heart is a change based on feeling/anger.

There is no way for the boards to decide who, if anyone, is actively misrepresenting things. You might want to let this one go.

So since we're addressing certain things you state: "I think that people have given a reasonable explanation for the gorgeous book comment". Where did he explain what he meant and what occurred? 

Secondly, "he could have given it a quick perusal, possibly through the bag, and just not noticed the defects." He expressly stated "in hand". He expressly stated "Gorgeous Book". "Looks incredible fresh" is not a "hey WTF?" or am I missing something?

Thanks Bird.

 

[Bird]

You're welcome!