I was told to email @Aimless my EE Appeal, but it doesn't appear that he is receiving it and it is too long to IM, so I am just going to post it to him here since my original thread was locked for some reason...Original Thread
This is Blain from AR15.com I wanted to reach out to you in regards to what I, and many others on the forum, believe was a raw deal.
I am a paying member of the forum, and have been a member since 2004. I have over 200 EE feedbacks, but in actuality I have probably conducted 3x that number of transactions from here. Lots were before feedback got reset, and often times in the past I didn't seek out feedback from every transaction.
I believe I was given negative feedback unjustly. I am not the only one, I've received several emails and PMs from people who said that the mod's decision not to over turn it wasn't right. If you look at that thread I linked, there are multiple people posting in the 2nd page on how this is the one time that they have disagreed with the EE staff's decision.
This was the basic situation. I posted I'd take an item that George_cle was selling. I emailed him to complete the transaction as I always pay the instant I tell someone I am buying an item, I don't wait on paying. The seller then tells me to "hold off on payment" so I could "decide" if I wanted to buy any of his other A1 parts. He then doesn't give me payment info, but instead gives me a list of other items he is looking to sell. I inquire about a couple of the items on his list, he says he'll get back to me the next day with pictures and prices. Over the course of the next few days we go back and forth discussing other items. The last correspondence we had was 3 days later, on a Saturday, where we were discussing about a completely unrelated item (a handguard). In all that time he 1.) Never asked for payment on the original item. 2.) Never Gave me Payment Information I didn't get back to him about wanting to buy the handguards, and he just rushes off and gives me a negative without even requesting payment or giving payment information.
Now, I do a LOT of not only buying / selling but inquiries, haggling, etc on listings on the EE. Sometimes it's hard to keep track of items / offers, etc. I did not realize that I had any items unpaid since I always pay the instant I say I'll buy something so that I don't have to worry about forgetting to miss a payment. However, since this guy had me hold off on payment, and never even provided me payment info, that didn't happen in this case. Over the next few days we were going back and forth about totally different items that he was trying to sell to me. However, instead of telling me that I hadn't paid, or providing me payment info so he could get paid on the original item, he drops coms and just gives me a negative. He never even once asked for payment on the original item (he admits that in the thread above). Why wouldn't you even ask for payment if you realize you hadn't gotten paid? Why rush to giving a negative? Something is fishy there.
The seller dropped coms about the original item and refused to give me payment info. He admitted this himself. If he provided payment info or asked for payment, I could understand the staff blaming me for "dropping coms". However, when the discussion over the last few days was over something completely different, and the seller never bothers to ask me about payment on the original item, I seriously don't see how they can claim I alone earned a negative.
Hey, mistakes happen. There have been situations where due to mix ups I've had to remind buyers to send payment. I always provide payment info to a buyer immediately after a buyer agrees to purchase something, and I ensure that they receive it. I can't imagine, from a sellers perspective (as I do both on the EE here):
#1.) Telling someone to hold off on payment
#2.) Not providing payment information
#3.) Not asking at any point (nevermind reminding) for payment on an item I just sold
Now, couple the above three with just rushing off to give a negative right away. Something's wrong there. If you read the thread many other posters feel the same way, and like I said I've received dozens of emails and IMs from other members about this as well. They all think it's crazy that I got a negative and that the site staff didn't reverse it.
Considering my length of membership and conduct on the board, I appreciate you re-evaluating this situation and hopefully righting what I feel is an egregious wrong.
(What some the other members are saying, not including personal Emails and IM's I've received)
"This is the first time I've ever disagreed with the mods in the EE as far as I can recall. Looks to me like both parties dropped the ball on communication, and a simple email from either could have cleared the whole thing up without the need for weeks of back and forth. Seems like if one earned a negative then they both did. And I really don't understand dropping a negative feedback prior to sending payment info, and without even trying to contact the other party.
I watch this forum mostly to learn about individuals I should avoid, and after seeing the way he handled this I will never do business with the seller here."
"I usually try to stay out of the peanut gallery, but have to say I also don't think this is right. I know that a lot of rules are hard to enforce the same way 100% of the time, and that the mods don't get paid to do this, but I think at the end of the day the rules are meant to ensure that any buyer or seller stands by their word, and does business fairly. That being said, if what Blain says is true, the seller did not follow up with a request for payment, and didn't have to go through the negative feedback thread process to try and get a resolution, the negative shouldn't be left to stand. If we look at any of the multitude of negative feedback threads that are active at any time, the buyer or seller usually has a chance to "make things right", an opportunity that Blain did not get."
"...the determination that a negative was justified is perplexing, at best.
This is the way the communications went, in chronological order, as I understand it:
- Blain told George_cle he'd purchase the item
- George_cle took the opportunity to try to sell Blain other stuff he didn't ask for
- Blain asked George_cle for a picture of one of the aforementioned items
- George_cle sent, and Blain asked a question about it
- George_cle answered question
At no time did George_cle say "Anyway, if you're not interested, just send payment for the original item to X." At no time did he remind Blain about the transaction that WAS agreed. At no time did he say ANYTHING AT ALL. Not by email, and not by IM.
Blain has stated here that he had been asking many people about various items, so it's completely understandable and believable that he could have forgotten that the communication about the second item (the one he asked for a picture of) was with the same person whom he had originally messaged about the first item. Most people don't necessarily respond to every message, especially if they're not interested in the item. This is true here, it's true on Craigslist, and it's true everywhere else.
In any event, if the onus was on Blain to remind George_cle to send him payment information, then it should have also been on George_cle to send that payment information. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Additionally, we've seen many sellers who stop communicating entirely once they receive payment. They don't follow up with tracking or anything else, leading the buyer to wonder if they've been scammed. Then, the item finally shows up in their mailbox two weeks later, after nearly 3 weeks of poor communication, and the mods/staff have said negative feedbacks in that case are not justified.
In this case, there was no poor communication. There was no ill intent. There was no claiming of an item with no intent to purchase or follow through. All there was was one email about a second item (again, which Blain NEVER asked about) that went unanswered.
I have to hope that there is more to this story than we are aware, because I have a hard time believing the staff (including the senior staff) could unanimously come to such an unreasonable determination. A paying member who has been here for 17 years and 200 positive feedbacks deserved and deserves better. I'd love the senior staff to respond here, as I'm sure I'm not the only one who is astounded by this."
"Agreed. Unless there's more to this story we haven't seen, it doesn't seem right at all that the OP got a negative. If allowed to stand, he should be able to give the other guy a reciprocal negative as well. "
"I’ve thought about posting in support of OP too for a little while now but didn’t want to upset anyone. I don’t think he deserves a negative. But I’m no one, and the mods do one hell of a good job in here. Just slightly disagree with this one."
"Length of membership (and especially number of successful transactions) is definitely a factor and should be. Blaine has over 200 positive feedback and has been a member for 16 years. It is pretty clear that he knows the rules and that this one transaction, even if it was 100% his fault (which I don't think it is), would be a minor blip in an otherwise outstanding record.
Blaine, if it helps, your feedback score in posts still shows 100% and the negative is on the second page of your feedback list already. I wouldn't feel any issue about buying or selling to you."
"This situation underscores my hesitancy to continue doing business here in the EE, and it isn't because of members like you Blain. Good luck with this."
Originally Posted By Abrenneman:
I’ve thought about posting in support of OP too for a little while now but didn’t want to upset anyone. I don’t think he deserves a negative. But I’m no one, and the mods do one hell of a good job in here. Just slightly disagree with this one.