Lets be clear now, your actions and motivations in questioning me are on par with the type of criminals YOU have condemned in the past.
Your first words should have been, "I think you done something wrong", rather than couch your accusations as a series of questions.
<font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">There you go, now you have my answer as well, just repeat yours and you have mine.Originally posted by shatzy:
and, no... i won't **** off... as this matter
goes beyond this board, thank you very much.
A meeting of the minds.
<font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">Bull **** , Bull **** , Bull **** , I knew you would try and pull this stunt, where you make an accusation and then pretend there is none, yet I QUOTED YOU.Originally posted by shatzy:
assume what you will, alex... as i have made no
claim as to which properties your motive, imo,
is -- positive or negative.
you have yet to answer the question
You have a pre-determined agenda.
**** you.
very well, alex... as you seem to wish to take
this to a personal level...
you have already admitted to emailing the bidder,
which is enough on my end of the table.
forgive me for attempting to steer your thick
head into a level complimentary to intelligence.
keep up the good work [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]
I'm not going to requote you because you IGNORE the quotes. Try rereading this topic thread with a shred of honesty and see all the places you IGNORED my direct responses.
But should I expect fair and reasonable behavior from you? You condemned me for lifting a lit cigarette out of the hand of a pregnant teenager when she wasn't looking, (and without touching her) yet you call the police on a group of high schools kids hanging out in the street at night.
You have plenty of other places to focus your energy on then this situation.
------------------------
Just thought I'd add an update to this topic, but rather than respond to it and "dredge it up" to the top of the forum, I'll just add the response here.
Mr. Pacini apparently tried to have me banished or punished or whatever from eBay, and of course, it went nowhere, I was never even contacted by Paypal or Ebay. The reason it went nowhere is pure and simple, Mr. Pacini simply had to update his own words, on a topic that he himself had started, and there never would have been a problem. To this day he still can update the topic post that HE HIMSELF started on another forum.
All Mr. Pacini had to do was simply respond to the prospective buyer by updating his topic, then tell the bidder to recheck the link.
I was once FALSELY accused by Mr. Pacini in regards to an email I had sent them and because of that I was not going to email him directly.
What also is not known is that the actual buyer of the camera was quite happy with the camera and I think is even friends with Matt to this day.
I should have been thanked, rather than run through the ringer.
It's really not hard to have integrity. Simply update a post if you have new information to share as that will then benefit anyone else who reads the topic in the future. If someone requests an update on a post that has not been updated, then update it, if that had been done in this situation, there wouldn't have been a situation.
Making a mountain out of this mole hole was witch hunting at it's finest hour, brought to you by the same people who got me banned from the Brantley forum, who then deny they had anything to do with it.
<font color="#FFFF00" size="1">[ April 19, 2006 10:48 AM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>
You should read the EXCLUSIONS Ebay provides. One of the exclusions is if the parties already know each other.
But why should I expect you to read the exclusions?
You would only read the ebay exclusions list if you wanted to be fair.
look...
i posed the query to ebay... i didn't search
for anything. the link i posted was given to
me from ebay... so take it up with them...
not me.
excuse you
<font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">Could you post a link to these "Exclusions" you are talking about?Originally posted by Alex:
You should read the EXCLUSIONS Ebay provides. One of the exclusions is if the parties already know each other.
But why should I expect you to read the exclusions?
You would only read the ebay exclusions list if you wanted to be fair.
<font size="2" face="verdana, sans-serif">Well, of course that's the whole problem, here, isn't it? Certainly Alex wasn't offering a link to say, "Look at this cool modification that Matt did to his camera". The modification was already known about and featured in the ad. Alex's only real motive was to suggest that the camera was not working correctly, even if he never said a word about it. Otherwise, why send the link?Originally posted by shatzy:
assuming your point is raised to ebay, how do you
intend on showing that your motive was NOT to
discourage bidding/purchasing??
Rationalize it all you want, Alex, but the bottom line is that YOU INTERFERED WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S EBAY AUCTION.
Shatzy has you pegged, dude.
Roger
Roger, once again, this has nothing to do with you, butt out.
--------------------------
TG, here is the wording as it appears on ebay, it is a pop up window on ebay so I could not find an actual link....
----------------------------------
What eBay does not investigate
There are many things the Investigations department doesn't investigate, including simple misunderstandings, failure to communicate, and interpersonal disputes over which eBay has no control.
-------------------------------
Basically, all of the above.
Matt didn't update his own forum topic even though he had close to a year to do so. AKA failure to communicate/update his own PUBLIC topic post that DIRECTLY RELATED to the situation at hand.
Interpersonal disputes also applies. I would not email Matt about this matter because he lied on Brantley's forum about an email I sent to him a couple of years ago and in the process of lying about my email to him slandered and harrassed me. If it had been anyone else other than Matt who had done what Matt did, I would have emailed the ebay seller and simply asked them to update their topic. Again, interpersonal issues prevented me from sending email to a liar. Also, I can not post on Brantley's forum. So on Brantley's forum, sometimes I am slammed by a select few even though they know I cannot respond. Sometimes I can resolve an unresolved situation or question, but since I can't reply to any post on Brantley's forum because I am banned, communication is not possible.
Matt retained complete control over this situation but MISUNDERSTOOD what was going on and instead of solving the problem by making a simple update to a topic post that he himself created, he chose to slander me on Brantley's forum, in a similar manner that he has slandered me in the past and in a similar manner to the way Matt has slandered others over the past few years.
Give it up.
Oh better yet, keep it up, keep it going and going, never let go, and then later, much much later, accuse me of being the one who can't let go of anything. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks