Members tripp2k Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Kill this {censored}in' thread. You guys are {censored}in' insane for dabbling in this as if you have a clue. You don't.I am therefore making an executive decision and making this final post a cap on anyone's {censored}in' opinion about this right here and right now because it is competing for space on {censored}in' pedals I want to buy. Get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibebucked Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 So just because he has plenty of money, means he should just give it away? Putz could easily have lied and said he didn't get the pedals, even though he did, or his friend (who's paypal account he used) could have easily stolen them. I would agree that apo is at fault, except the two address thing mentioned earlier puts a lot of the blame on putz. Nobody is claiming that he should just give money away (I wouldn't either), but one of his claims or defenses was that he couldn't make it right if he wanted to because he couldn't afford to. My exact point was that he may have "chose" not to as you suggest, but his defense of not having the money to make it right is weak at best in my book and at worst it smells of complete misrepresentation which could have some bearing on credibility...that's all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members elxchino Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 eh I want more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tripp2k Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 eh I want more No. Fully baked...particularly when I saw this "smells of complete misrepresentation". When some numbnoid thinks he can smell this out here in the 1s and 0s, then it has reached the highest levels of dumbassness and therefore capped. Bring back the those big {censored}in' rabbits and have them clear a path to some damn pedals.:phil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibebucked Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Cats..he didn't admit he was wrong. He asked why he should send the guitar back, then only get his money back from Putz but still be missing the pedals? He clearly said he wouldn't do that and if that made him the bad guy, then so be it.Why is it that Putz can't be lying? Still no one has answered that question. What makes Putz so honest? Because he said he got ripped off? I can say I got ripped off, but that doesn't make it true. Because Apo is tired of dealing with a childish attitude that stalks him from thread to thread? I mean come on...at some point you would get fed up also and just simply stop acknowledging the behavior.I'm absolutely willing to bet that if Putz had approached Apo intelligently and maturely when this all started, the answers and outcome would have been very different.Either way, you know already that I have said they both need to pony up and come to a middle ground, but it seems that just won't happen. I don't really feel it's fair to drop it squarely on Apo though, they are BOTH at fault. I don't see how you determine that Putz has more credibility or is telling the truth moreso then Apo...I just don't see it. Clonexx...no doubt that Putz "could be" lying. Assuming he is lying...the fix for that would be for Apo to provide proof of delivery for the pedals. He can't do that so "if" Putz is lying Apo doesn't know that for sure and he doesn't seem to care either way. Apo didn't protect himself in that event. Let's next assume that Putz is not lying...then Apo owes him...plain and simple. Either way it's on Apo no matter how he was approached. In the end you are right that we don't know who is lying it's just that regardless it's Apo's responsibility to resolve it....problem is he can't/won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ornjbird Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 I've finally done it. I am trolling this thread to take an obscene advantage of a commercial situation. Can I be a MEMBER now or does that just make me a tool? ...uh hey folks come on over to my threads and argue shout and bicker for I truly have some stuff only few true eccentrics may be interested in and quite honestly the exposure could'nt hurt more than I do for making snow angels in northern michigan the "wrong" way down this time of year. Hey what do they call that in congress when they want to hold up a bill or stop some other such nonsense from taking place? I mean verbally. Not physiclly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tripp2k Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 I've finally done it. I am trolling this thread to take an obscene advantage of a commercial situation. Can I be a MEMBER now or does that just make me a tool? ...uh hey folks come on over to my threads and argue shout and bicker for I truly have some stuff only few true eccentrics may be interested in and quite honestly the exposure could'nt hurt more than I do for making snow angels in northern michigan the "wrong" way down this time of year. Hey what do they call that in congress when they want to hold up a bill or stop some other such nonsense from taking place? I mean verbally. Not physiclly Sure we do. Cart this man off to the padded room.:lem: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ornjbird Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Thankyou Sir, Bless you, I'll be waiting in the gazebo on the thre legged family gredunza... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibebucked Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 I've finally done it. I am trolling this thread to take an obscene advantage of a commercial situation. Can I be a MEMBER now or does that just make me a tool? ...uh hey folks come on over to my threads and argue shout and bicker for I truly have some stuff only few true eccentrics may be interested in and quite honestly the exposure could'nt hurt more than I do for making snow angels in northern michigan the "wrong" way down this time of year. Hey what do they call that in congress when they want to hold up a bill or stop some other such nonsense from taking place? I mean verbally. Not physiclly WTF kinda pyscho-babble is this? Canyouanalyzebitemycrankorhowaboutphilosophicalmidget? Goodluckwithlife! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ornjbird Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 My point exactly. Thank you for defining it so eloquantly. for you se I can not spell either. I shall take my leave and be done with you... and truly Thanks for the humor .. rgards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nagshay1818 Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Sweet guys! This thread has overthrown the Good/Bad Deals by post number. And, only a mere 1500 views and it will also lead the Good/Bad Deals thread in view counts. Can we really not moves this whole discussion to the appropriate place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibebucked Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 My point exactly. Thank you for defining it so eloquantly. for you se I can not spell either. I shall take my leave and be done with you... and truly Thanks for the humor .. rgards Touche' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members petejt Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 wherez teh catz? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members M1K3999 Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Wherez teh catz +1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kesa Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Post LOL cats if you got em! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members smashingtime Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 meow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wrathchild1 Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 i had sex with a 65 year old woman...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pedaler Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 here kitty........................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pedaler Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 [YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vash_08 Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 I've finally done it. I am trolling this thread to take an obscene advantage of a commercial situation. Can I be a MEMBER now or does that just make me a tool? ...uh hey folks come on over to my threads and argue shout and bicker for I truly have some stuff only few true eccentrics may be interested in and quite honestly the exposure could'nt hurt more than I do for making snow angels in northern michigan the "wrong" way down this time of year. Hey what do they call that in congress when they want to hold up a bill or stop some other such nonsense from taking place? I mean verbally. Not physiclly filibuster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bassin' 'Round Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 This is wrong in so many ways, let's count them up. 1. How can the buyer be responsible for something he has never seen or touched? The seller has the item, he is responsible for shipping. 2. The post office has a responsibility to the SELLER, therefore, the responsiblity if the post office doesnt perform is the SELLERS responsibility. 3. Since the seller takes it to the post office, addresses the item, and makes the contract with the post office(insurance), it would only be natural that the seller is responsible. I bet you have never had an item lost in shipment that you sold on eBay. You will learn really quickly who is responsible for an "item not received" if you ever sell something and lose it in shipment. The buyer is responsible to pay for insurance if he wants to guard against non-delivery or damage. Period. If he doesn't pay, then it's his choice, but he forfeits his right to complain if it doesn't arrive or if something happens to it in transit. Sellers very seldom include insurance with pedals sold on forums. When a seller sells, it's almost always PayPal'ed & shipped USPS. Many times it's just plain old "shipped", not even a Delivery Confirmation. Personally, I always ship with the Delivery Confirmation. But I don't advertise insurance, nor will I ship with insurance unless the buyer pays additional money. The buyer usually wants to spend as little as possible & is willing to take a chance that the pedal will arrive without incident. If he states he wants insurance, I'll add it, but at a cost to him. If I'm selliong on evilbay, I build insurance into the shipping price & the buyer pays for it if he wins the auction. Bottom line is the buyer must pay for insurance or he isn't getting it. Is that so difficult to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibebucked Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 The buyer is responsible to pay for insurance if he wants to guard against non-delivery or damage. Period. If he doesn't pay, then it's his choice, but he forfeits his right to complain if it doesn't arrive or if something happens to it in transit. Sellers very seldom include insurance with pedals sold on forums. When a seller sells, it's almost always PayPal'ed & shipped USPS. Many times it's just plain old "shipped", not even a Delivery Confirmation. Personally, I always ship with the Delivery Confirmation. But I don't advertise insurance, nor will I ship with insurance unless the buyer pays additional money. The buyer usually wants to spend as little as possible & is willing to take a chance that the pedal will arrive without incident. If he states he wants insurance, I'll add it, but at a cost to him. If I'm selliong on evilbay, I build insurance into the shipping price & the buyer pays for it if he wins the auction.Bottom line is the buyer must pay for insurance or he isn't getting it. Is that so difficult to understand? Who says that the buyer is responsible for the insurance? Not the courts. Is this your rule or maybe a rule that you "want" to be the norm? Granted, the buyer pays all the costs whether it is built in or not. If you offer the buyer insurance at an extra cost and they turn it down, then cerainly it is on the buyer, but any absence of communication concerning the insurance the burden is then on the seller to deliver merchandise in working order...that's the law. Hence, it actually is protection for the seller in that situation because if he doesn't deliver (his shipping choice) the goods in merchantable condition the courts will rule in favor of the buyer every time (even though these are seldom litigated because of the distance and relative costs of most of these items). The example you give involves clear communication and is true only in that situation...is that so difficult to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catsandstrats Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Who says that the buyer is responsible for the insurance? Not the courts. Is this your rule or maybe a rule that you "want" to be the norm? Granted, the buyer pays all the costs whether it is built in or not. If you offer the buyer insurance at an extra cost and they turn it down, then cerainly it is on the buyer, but any absence of communication concerning the insurance the burden is then on the seller to deliver merchandise in working order...that's the law. Hence, it actually is protection for the seller in that situation because if he doesn't deliver (his shipping choice) the goods in merchantable condition the courts will rule in favor of the buyer every time (even though these are seldom litigated because of the distance and relative costs of most of these items). The example you give involves clear communication and is true only in that situation...is that so difficult to understand? I dont think that guy would ever understand this. Most of these kids have never owned a business, never been responsible for anything other than homework, and dont understand the law much besides how much weed they can carry without going to jail. I give up on trading in the forums......i will pay a little extra on eBay just so I dont have to deal with bull{censored} like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bassin' 'Round Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 I dont think that guy would ever understand this. Most of these kids have never owned a business, never been responsible for anything other than homework, and dont understand the law much besides how much weed they can carry without going to jail. I give up on trading in the forums......i will pay a little extra on eBay just so I dont have to deal with bull{censored} like this.Great news! Know what? You should probably give up posting on the forum, too. Your head is full of rocks. Buyer doesn't get any goods without paying for them. Likewise, buyer gets no insurance with paying for it. Unless he buys from a numbskull who gives something for nothing. Do you ship for free, also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bassin' 'Round Posted March 4, 2009 Members Share Posted March 4, 2009 Who says that the buyer is responsible for the insurance? Not the courts. Is this your rule or maybe a rule that you "want" to be the norm? Granted, the buyer pays all the costs whether it is built in or not. If you offer the buyer insurance at an extra cost and they turn it down, then cerainly it is on the buyer, but any absence of communication concerning the insurance the burden is then on the seller to deliver merchandise in working order...that's the law. Hence, it actually is protection for the seller in that situation because if he doesn't deliver (his shipping choice) the goods in merchantable condition the courts will rule in favor of the buyer every time (even though these are seldom litigated because of the distance and relative costs of most of these items). The example you give involves clear communication and is true only in that situation...is that so difficult to understand?No, it isn't. And that's what I do. Communicate. Do you understand? Do you provide insurance for free? Do you ship for free? Or are you compensated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.