Nominating Asteroid-Comix 1 1

[I like pie]

Not sure if this is only a problem on my end but years ago, I used to get email notifications when I got a new message here. I've tried messing with all my filters(email &here) to no avail.

Does anyone still get those? If not, this situation may have been avoided with an email notification.

[Ryan.]

2 minutes ago, I like pie said:

Not sure if this is only a problem on my end but years ago, I used to get email notifications when I got a new message here. I've tried messing with all my filters(email &here) to no avail.

Does anyone still get those? If not, this situation may have been avoided with an email notification.

I have email notifications enabled. 

[Logan510]

6 hours ago, manetteska said:

I know everyone likes the pile-up, but (assuming the timeline and crickets and lack of tracking are true) if the seller received payment and never responded nor shipped for > 30 days, what is the buyer supposed to do? Probably assumes sending yet another PM would also go unread.

I don't know if one can "start the clock" on January 1st if that shipping arrangement is not agreed to by both parties.

 

Did you see what he did in the other thread? New guy + shadiness = I’m going to side with the guy who’s been here for years who’s had no issues as a seller. 

[I like pie]

13 minutes ago, Ryan. said:

I have email notifications enabled. 

Grrr. So weird. Mine are as well but they must be getting filtered by hotmail.

[NP_Gresham]

Given this completly bogus nomination and the previous history of editing a post for bid retraction and asking for CBCS books in a WTB which is not allowed here - I will definitly have the OP on my personal list if he does not go on the probation list.

[telerites]

5 hours ago, I like pie said:

Grrr. So weird. Mine are as well but they must be getting filtered by hotmail.

I am having the same issue.  I use Yahoo but nothing in spam.  It started a month or so ago.

[manetteska]

14 hours ago, Logan510 said:

21 hours ago, manetteska said:

I know everyone likes the pile-up, but (assuming the timeline and crickets and lack of tracking are true) if the seller received payment and never responded nor shipped for > 30 days, what is the buyer supposed to do? Probably assumes sending yet another PM would also go unread.

I don't know if one can "start the clock" on January 1st if that shipping arrangement is not agreed to by both parties.

 

Did you see what he did in the other thread? New guy + shadiness = I’m going to side with the guy who’s been here for years who’s had no issues as a seller

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

[DeadOne]

7 minutes ago, manetteska said:

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

The buyer is the one who asked for the book to be held and shipped at a later date, so technically the seller shouldn't even be nominated until 30 days from that date, not the payment date.

It is odd though that the buyer says the seller never responded to any message from the time of payment until this thread was created. 

[manetteska]

11 minutes ago, DeadOne said:

27 minutes ago, manetteska said:

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

The buyer is the one who asked for the book to be held and shipped at a later date, so technically the seller shouldn't even be nominated until 30 days from that date, not the payment date.

It is odd though that the buyer says the seller never responded to any message from the time of payment until this thread was created. 

Yes, the buyer did ask for a later shipping date, but the seller (allegedly) never said yes or no to that date. And never said anything since. So how can that "asked for" date come into play if it was never agreed upon by both parties?

[Logan510]

46 minutes ago, manetteska said:

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

You need to read the other thread to get the full picture dude. Yes, that other thread impacts what happened here because it shows a pattern of shady behavior.

[manetteska]

15 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

1 hour ago, manetteska said:

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

You need to read the other thread to get the full picture dude. Yes, that other thread impacts what happened here because it shows a pattern of shady behavior.

Shady behavior or dumb behavior? 

I get it, backing out of that purchase (and publicly) was a very bad way to start. Perhaps this current PayPal dispute was a way to "get the book and keep the money, too", but if the seller really never replied to messages for 30+ days after accepting payment it's not black-and-white.

[MustEatBrains]

31 minutes ago, manetteska said:

Shady behavior or dumb behavior? 

I get it, backing out of that purchase (and publicly) was a very bad way to start. Perhaps this current PayPal dispute was a way to "get the book and keep the money, too", but if the seller really never replied to messages for 30+ days after accepting payment it's not black-and-white.

Everyone's entitled to thier opinion but think most peoples minds are made up about what went on here.  For arguments sake let's say the clock starts ticking as soon as payment is made, did the buyer send the seller a PM stating he was going to be nominated and give the proper waiting period as stipulated by the rules?  I don't care to hear the excuse that well, I didn't do that because he didn't reply to previous PMs anyway...   The rules exist for a reason here.  We all get to decide who we choose to do business with and this guy is a red flag at least for me.  It's unclear whether there was an actual PM asking the question for delayed shipping, I just saw a note in PP that was a statement.  Honestly if a buyer sent me payment and said don't ship until x date, I wouldn't reply to the paypal message either unless it was formed as a question, like hey just let me know if that's ok? The omission of relevant info by the buyer from the onset along with the book sitting in a pile of unopened boxes at his house while he took his rant to the boards make him lose all credibility... 

[Logan510]

14 minutes ago, MustEatBrains said:

Everyone's entitled to thier opinion but think most peoples minds are made up about what went on here.  For arguments sake let's say the clock starts ticking as soon as payment is made, did the buyer send the seller a PM stating he was going to be nominated and give the proper waiting period as stipulated by the rules?  I don't care to hear the excuse that well, I didn't do that because he didn't reply to previous PMs anyway...   The rules exist for a reason here.  We all get to decide who we choose to do business with and this guy is a red flag at least for me.  It's unclear whether there was an actual PM asking the question for delayed shipping, I just saw a note in PP that was a statement.  Honestly if a buyer sent me payment and said don't ship until x date, I wouldn't reply to the paypal message either unless it was formed as a question, like hey just let me know if that's ok? The omission of relevant info by the buyer from the onset along with the book sitting in a pile of unopened boxes at his house while he took his rant to the boards make him lose all credibility... 

That along with the other thread cinched it for me. The OP need to start a sales thread stat to repair his bad reputation.

 

[masterlogan2000]

 

44 minutes ago, manetteska said:

1 hour ago, Logan510 said:

1 hour ago, manetteska said:

No, I did not look at the other threads. I'm looking at the issue at hand; did the other threads impact this transaction?

I know Asteroid has been here for some time, but if you send payment and multiple PMs and get radio silence for 30+ days, what do you suggest?

Of course, this is assuming the info given by the buyer is accurate.

You need to read the other thread to get the full picture dude. Yes, that other thread impacts what happened here because it shows a pattern of shady behavior.

Shady behavior or dumb behavior? 

I get it, backing out of that purchase (and publicly) was a very bad way to start. Perhaps this current PayPal dispute was a way to "get the book and keep the money, too", but if the seller really never replied to messages for 30+ days after accepting payment it's not black-and-white.

I have worked with Frank on many occasions and jump at any opportunity to purchase from his threads.  IMO, he's one of the best guys on this entire forum.

With that said, I have to agree with @manetteska here.  If there was never a confirmation that the book was to be held until 01/01, then I can see how the buyer could have a case.  Afterall, how would the buyer know that the seller didn't just disappear (especially if there was indeed no tracking number)?  Should Frank have been nominated here?  If the clock started on December 9th when payment was made, then that constitutes 30 days from the time of the original post.  There is an argument that this is valid.

Now, this doesn't dismiss the buyer's behavior in other threads, but those issues should be taken into account separately with regards to the discussion of this exact issue.  Otherwise, if this buyer (or anyone in a similar situation) had a legitimate issue, he would have no recourse, as he's automatically assumed guilty.

Could this situation have been handled better?  Absolutely!  Should a PayPal dispute have been opened before the the nomination here?  IMO, no (you have 45 days to open a PayPal dispute, so 15 days to work something out here).

Don't take this as me outright defending the buyer.  As manetteska stated, this isn't so black and white.  The buyer already stated that the nomination can be closed.  The PayPal dispute has supposedly also been closed.  The buyer didn't do himself any favors here, but I think we can all put him on our block list and simply move on.

[fmaz]

This thread is incredibly hard to read... but MUST reading for anyone who wants to see damage control AT ITS WORST.  If you want to give OP the complete benefit of the doubt, he overreacted to a situation as an inexperienced buyer, and then made an unfortunate decision to lash out at someone and attempt to tarnish their reputation with partial facts.  That being said? Once he was given all the facts, everyone, including the seller who said as much, would have been completely ready to forgive and forget if he’d just admitted his error of judgement and moved on.  But time and time again he avoids opportunities to defuse the situation, and there can’t possibly be anyone reading to this point who has any sympathy left for him. 

It’s quite a remarkable performance ... and one that was totally of his own making. 

[Logan510]

1 hour ago, masterlogan2000 said:

 

I have worked with Frank on many occasions and jump at any opportunity to purchase from his threads.  IMO, he's one of the best guys on this entire forum.

With that said, I have to agree with @manetteska here.  If there was never a confirmation that the book was to be held until 01/01, then I can see how the buyer could have a case.  Afterall, how would the buyer know that the seller didn't just disappear (especially if there was indeed no tracking number)?  Should Frank have been nominated here?  If the clock started on December 9th when payment was made, then that constitutes 30 days from the time of the original post.  There is an argument that this is valid.

Now, this doesn't dismiss the buyer's behavior in other threads, but those issues should be taken into account separately with regards to the discussion of this exact issue.  Otherwise, if this buyer (or anyone in a similar situation) had a legitimate issue, he would have no recourse, as he's automatically assumed guilty.

Could this situation have been handled better?  Absolutely!  Should a PayPal dispute have been opened before the the nomination here?  IMO, no (you have 45 days to open a PayPal dispute, so 15 days to work something out here).

Don't take this as me outright defending the buyer.  As manetteska stated, this isn't so black and white.  The buyer already stated that the nomination can be closed.  The PayPal dispute has supposedly also been closed.  The buyer didn't do himself any favors here, but I think we can all put him on our block list and simply move on.

I disagree. If he was just your every day d-bag who didn't get along with people you might have a case. But he had bad behavior in another sales thread which shows a pattern which absolutely must be taken into account with this issue.

[KPR Comics]

The note said please ship AFTER 1/1/19, which Seller did.  Personal List updated.

[MustEatBrains]

1 hour ago, masterlogan2000 said:

 

I have worked with Frank on many occasions and jump at any opportunity to purchase from his threads.  IMO, he's one of the best guys on this entire forum.

With that said, I have to agree with @manetteska here.  If there was never a confirmation that the book was to be held until 01/01, then I can see how the buyer could have a case.  Afterall, how would the buyer know that the seller didn't just disappear (especially if there was indeed no tracking number)?  Should Frank have been nominated here?  If the clock started on December 9th when payment was made, then that constitutes 30 days from the time of the original post.  There is an argument that this is valid.

Now, this doesn't dismiss the buyer's behavior in other threads, but those issues should be taken into account separately with regards to the discussion of this exact issue.  Otherwise, if this buyer (or anyone in a similar situation) had a legitimate issue, he would have no recourse, as he's automatically assumed guilty.

Could this situation have been handled better?  Absolutely!  Should a PayPal dispute have been opened before the the nomination here?  IMO, no (you have 45 days to open a PayPal dispute, so 15 days to work something out here).

Don't take this as me outright defending the buyer.  As manetteska stated, this isn't so black and white.  The buyer already stated that the nomination can be closed.  The PayPal dispute has supposedly also been closed.  The buyer didn't do himself any favors here, but I think we can all put him on our block list and simply move on.

If the clock started on December 9th when payment was made, then that constitutes 30 days from the time of the original post.  There is an argument that this is valid.
Not really as the buyer failed to adhere to the PL nomination rules requiring him to notify the seller of the PL nomination, and sit though the waiting period before bringing it to the boards,  these have been in place for years. 

but I think we can all put him on our block list and simply move on
Amen

[seanfingh]

4 hours ago, masterlogan2000 said:

 

I have worked with Frank on many occasions and jump at any opportunity to purchase from his threads.  IMO, he's one of the best guys on this entire forum.

With that said, I have to agree with @manetteska here.  If there was never a confirmation that the book was to be held until 01/01, then I can see how the buyer could have a case.  Afterall, how would the buyer know that the seller didn't just disappear (especially if there was indeed no tracking number)?  Should Frank have been nominated here?  If the clock started on December 9th when payment was made, then that constitutes 30 days from the time of the original post.  There is an argument that this is valid.

Now, this doesn't dismiss the buyer's behavior in other threads, but those issues should be taken into account separately with regards to the discussion of this exact issue.  Otherwise, if this buyer (or anyone in a similar situation) had a legitimate issue, he would have no recourse, as he's automatically assumed guilty.

Could this situation have been handled better?  Absolutely!  Should a PayPal dispute have been opened before the the nomination here?  IMO, no (you have 45 days to open a PayPal dispute, so 15 days to work something out here).

Don't take this as me outright defending the buyer.  As manetteska stated, this isn't so black and white.  The buyer already stated that the nomination can be closed.  The PayPal dispute has supposedly also been closed.  The buyer didn't do himself any favors here, but I think we can all put him on our block list and simply move on.

This is very well reasoned.  But I will say that I had been the Seller and they dropped the "don't ship until after Jan 1" on me I would not have even though about it again until the first weekend of January, and it would have been exactly the same for me as it was for Frank. You can't ask for something, have the Seller do it within a reasonable time, start a Paypal dispute and then complain about lack of communication.  Buyer was the one who asked for the three week shipping accommodation. Who knows how inconvenient that may have been for Frank. But he did it and got all the BS for his trouble.

Sorry about not just doing another meme.

 

[ChiSoxFan]

My last .

If **I** had been in the OP's shoes initially, I would have done the following:

1) Sent the seller a PM before claiming the book, requesting if a later ship date would have been okay, since it would be a request that would not be par for the course for nearly all sales transactions here.  It wasn't an unreasonable request (I've had buyers in my sales threads request a book to be delayed to sent, though never as long as in this case -- though I would have likely granted it), but the OP would have gotten his confirmation right there and then, since the seller was in the middle of running the sales thread (and since an invoice was sent, I'm guessing, would have seen the request to answer it beforehand).

2) If I had tried to contact the seller after January 1 for a tracking number and hadn't gotten a reply, I would not have immediately jumped to the nuclear option -- a nomination to the PL -- to resolve the issue.  Considering everyone could presumably still be dealing with holiday-related matters (the OP himself was going on vacation, so there could have been any number of similar, understandable reasons why a PM wasn't being answered at this time by the seller, or during the time following the intial payment being sent), I would have looked at a number of other options available, such as bringing up the matter in the Probation List Discussion thread, with full disclosure on the transaction, such as "I bought a book on "X' date from board member "X", requested it be shipped on "X" date. but I haven't heard anything since.  What should I do?".

The replies would have likely been helpful and all over the spectrum.  Possibly anything from "You changed the shipping date, so you can't bring up a PL nomination until "X" date" to "I've dealt with board member "X", you're going to get your book" to even maybe "I know board member "X', and he hasn't been on the site, probably because it's been the holidays -- let me try to reach him for you" or "Post in the General Discussion forum to see if anyone has heard from board member "X".  I'd guess that almost no one would have advocated either a PayPal claim at this point (particularly since PayPal has moved their claim period to that whopping 180 days), and almost no one would have advocated for a PL nomination.  That extended PayPal claim period would have easily protected the OP in this case -- a few extra days at this point wouldn't have mattered, and having done the first point -- requesting the later shipping date before purchasing -- would have made a PL nomination a non-starter anyway.

Doing both of these would have resulted in the seller likely getting helpful advice from a number of others, and then finding less than a day after asking said questions, the book delivered, and any damage to anyone's reputation being averted. Instead, while the OP did answer here (after I asked) whether the book had arrived, and after myself and at least one other boardie asked whether the PP claim was dropped, he still has never addressed why he left out the most pertinent info -- his request to delay the shipping date -- from his initial detailings here. 

I've had books go "missing" for short periods thanks the the USPS before on rare occasions (from a buyer's perspective) and I've had very trusted board members here who've I done large purchases with who weren't immediate with their replies to my PM's (sometimes, I have had to wait days to get a response on something, such as request as to whether a book had shipped or not).  I've never moved even to the PL discussion thread before with any complaints, because I try to vet the sellers I buy from beforehand, and I have the patience to wait out the situation an appropriate time and consider all possible factors (and in this case, the holidays could definitely have been a factor, since I was barely on here during them myself, whereas I tend to be every day at some point otherwise during the year).  Sometimes, before you jump to the highest-level response, you have to have restraint and not rush the process.

And Logan510 is right with a point he brought up -- I had more sympathy for the OP's position as a relative newcomer here -- until his previous bad buyer's behavior in bcc's earlier selling thread was pointed out.  A pattern of issues as a buyer -- seemingly rash decision-making (immediately nominating the seller for the PL at the first available opportunity and retracting a claim to purchase in a case of what looked like buyer's remorse in the other mentioned thread) -- are what makes me (and others) update their own personal lists.  Following a more patient and restrained course of action would have made this entire thread unnecessary.