I agree with the buyer and the sellers.
I agree that buyers need to read at least the basics before transacting. I don't know how many posts here blame ebay and call it fraud because of the action of less than ethical sellers. It just shows ignorance on part of these buyers. Similarly, in this case, buyer has left -ve feedback without contacting the seller first. This means he neither read ebay's policies nor the seller's in his listing. I personally would never order without at least reading the entire listing.
But at the same time, ebay is still a buyer's beware kind of place. And if one does get into a conflict, it is a game of chance how the conflict is resolved. Although community court is in place, and it is needed so that buyers do not spoil the seller's reputation just out of spite, it lacks transparency. I don't want to know
who voted, but i would surely like to know
why each of the 21 people voted the way they did.
I too had left a negative feedback for an unresponsive seller. Called him, mail him, messaged him, no reply and no delivery. Although i got refunded automatically according to Paisapay policies, and seller did not have to lift a finger, seller claimed in his case why i am complaining because HE gave me refund. Seriously!!? But he managed to get it removed thru community court with 51% majority. I have to admit that seeing that i lost by one vote (and that same is the case with many others), and i don't know
why people voted the way they did, my first thought was that there is a mili-bhagat involved. It is logical in a way, because community court is made up of sellers, and one might be tempted to give the other a benefit of doubt.
My request to ebay: Community court is a great idea, but making the reason why each person voted the way he/she did will go a long way into making it a well-rounded idea.
-- Signature: I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
-- Signature: I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.