[gofour3]

Yeah it does smell funny, why would someone buy a lens like that and remove some elements and then return it? I also like the part where the seller states all the elements were removed except the front and then says he has no idea if anything else was removed internally. Did or did he not open up the lens and check what was missing?

Notice how it’s a “Canadian” who’s to blame for the first problem and then a guy from “Asia” (No need to specify a country, just lump them all together) who did not pay for the missing element lens. It’s always easier to blame someone far from home, it makes a better sob story. There must be a lot of heathens using eBay in those places.

[Blue]

Yeah it does smell funny, why would someone buy a lens like that and remove some elements and then return it? I also like the part where the seller states all the elements were removed except the front and then says he has no idea if anything else was removed internally. Did or did he not open up the lens and check what was missing?

Notice how it’s a “Canadian” who’s to blame for the first problem and then a guy from “Asia” (No need to specify a country, just lump them all together) who did not pay for the missing element lens. It’s always easier to blame someone far from home, it makes a better sob story. There must be a lot of heathens using eBay in those places.

Would it be better if he blamed the Nigerians? I agree the whole thing is fishy. However, he has a 100% rating with several thousand transactions. That's what makes this more intriguing.

[K-9]

A photo from the original ebay listing compared to the photo of when he got it back could have been enough evidence for Paypal to vote in the seller's favor.

Remember, 100% ebay feedback isn't what it used to be. That just means out of the last 12 months, if a seller sold 22 items, and he got 22 positives, he's at 100%. It doesn't show you the 15 negatives he could have had each and every year for the 8 years prior to these last good 22 positives. The feedback window now only shows 1, 6, and 12 month running tallies, nothing beyond that.

I like the old way of keeping a running percentage of a seller's complete history. The new way favors bad sellers. I've been on ebay since 1997 with 100% positives for selling without one negative or even a neutral. Now, I have only sold about 2 things in the last 12 months, so if I sell 1 thing and get a negative, I'll have a 66% rating and look like one of ebay's worst criminals, and worse than the guy whose been on for 10 years, has 134 prior negatives, but has none in the past year so they look like a saint.

[Blue]

I didn't realize they had changed that. I have 100% over the past 10 years and ~330 deals plus multiple purchases from some which don't tally within a certain time period.

I agree that they should let it reflect. That's what the 30 day, 6 month and past year was for.

[K-9]

Yes, I have 1800+ positives, but if I sell 10 things this year and get one negative, I'm at 90% (9/10), when using the old method, I'd still be at 99.9% (1799/1800). Bad sellers can just wait a few months until the negatives fall off the 12 month window and begin selling again, with unsuspecting buyers just waiting to buy from who they think is a perfect seller, and unbeknownst to them, they could get burned.

There's no incentive or real perk for sellers who have multiple year good track records. I personally would rather buy from a seller who's had 100% feeback for 8 years, than one who's had it for 8 months. Now, every seller is on an even plane for a 1 year period. IMO, the new feedback system only helps the bad sellers cover up old feedback.