From: Lord Edam de Fromage on
In article <el3id1$9rc$1(a)news.freedom2surf.net>, nospam(a)thisaddress.net
says...

> Agreed, as was pointed out to eBay during the recent 'Power Seller Outreach'
> initiative and posted here now several times, the solution put to eBay was
> the introduction of a 'Mutual Agreement' for cancellation initiated by the
> buyer, to which the seller then accepts, automatically recovering any fees.
>
> Given there is little any business, or in fact any eBay seller, could do to
> force any eBay buyer to complete any eBay transaction without
> disproportionate cost, effort and expense and the distinct
> possibility of ultimate failure to achieve the goal, it would be futile in
> most circumstances, and in many illegal to refuse the cancellation.
>
> This solutions works perfectly for all parties,

not really perfect, though it would be a step in the right direction.
You can't limit the right to cancel to the mutual agreement process, so
you'd still have to accept emails or written letters that bypass this

(though possibly making return of goods a requirement following DSR
cancellation, and only accepting DSR/non-faulty returns processed
through the mutual agreement process would solve this. you'd have to let
the buyer know of this condition in advance and there are problems with
this related to the timescales for refunds & returns - specifically the
latest time for refund being before the latest time for return of goods)
From: Alison Hopkins on

"Need a little help please" <nospam(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
news:el3lns$bsd$1(a)news.freedom2surf.net...
>

> Perhaps you should do a qualification in basic ICT then, since you
> originally made the comment "Would you mind awfully using a bot that trims
> sigs?", having failed to remove it yourself, prompting the response "Would
> you mind awfully using a bot that trims sigs?"
>
>

If you mean Niel's sig that you consistently forget to snip every time you
reply to his posts, I deliberately left it in to illustrate your error.

HTH.


From: Alison Hopkins on

"Need a little help please" <nospam(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
news:el3lns$bsd$2(a)news.freedom2surf.net...
>
> "Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
> news:4tl3ljF14igksU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Need a little help please" <nospam(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
>> news:el3l4n$bgp$1(a)news.freedom2surf.net...
>>>
>>> "Niel Humphreys" <admin(a)sznzozwzdzoznzczozmzpzuztzezrzs.co.uk> wrote in
>>> message news:lvGdnQxRFbsVy-jYnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>>
>>>> Niel H
>>>> http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Snowdon-Computers
>>>> http://www.ebayfaq.co.uk/
>>>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/UK_Powersellers/
>>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed, that would indeed appear to be the case.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> QED.
>>
>
> Latin, very good, we are all suitably impressed......
>
>

QED = quod erat demonstrandum. Or, in English, an example, yet again, of
where you seem unfamiliar with correct practice.

I've left Niel's sig in again to show where you've forgotten to trim.

HTH.


From: Alison Hopkins on

"Marcus Redd" <read(a)it.com> wrote in message
news:4575690d$0$5478$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...

> Yeah. Although I don't deserver either the neg or the strike. No doubt the
> seller-nazis here will disagree, but they'll be wrong, and I've got all
> the "important" (hehe) ones kf-ed anyway.

I'm a buyer, not a seller. I think you are totally wrong: you stated that
you did not bother to read the whole listing. You then blame others for your
own failure. You deserve what you get.

Ali


From: Need a little help please on

"Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:4tl5fmF14e4akU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> "Need a little help please" <nospam(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
> news:el3lns$bsd$2(a)news.freedom2surf.net...
>>
>> "Alison Hopkins" <fn62(a)dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
>> news:4tl3ljF14igksU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>>>
>>> "Need a little help please" <nospam(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
>>> news:el3l4n$bgp$1(a)news.freedom2surf.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Niel Humphreys" <admin(a)sznzozwzdzoznzczozmzpzuztzezrzs.co.uk> wrote in
>>>> message news:lvGdnQxRFbsVy-jYnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d(a)pipex.net...
>>>
>>>>> Niel H
>>>>> http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Snowdon-Computers
>>>>> http://www.ebayfaq.co.uk/
>>>>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/UK_Powersellers/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Agreed, that would indeed appear to be the case.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> QED.
>>>
>>
>> Latin, very good, we are all suitably impressed......
>>
>>
>
> QED = quod erat demonstrandum. Or, in English, an example, yet again, of
> where you seem unfamiliar with correct practice.
>
> I've left Niel's sig in again to show where you've forgotten to trim.
>
> HTH.
>

You seem to be proceeding under the incorrect impression that trimming was
intended, but was forgotten. If Niel wants to repeatedly post expletives in
his 'contributions' and drag his reputation and 'business' further through
the mud, then so be it, his posts will not be censored by myself.

However, it has been noted that occasionally he does manage a little self
trimming of his own sig when being particularly offensive.

Indeed, Niel was once held with some regard by myself, however, that has
been diminished to some extent by his continuing usage of entirely
unnecessary expletives, perhaps indicative of limited intellect and
vocabulary, if not his ignorance of law applicable to both business in
general and eBay, to which he claims he is "only interesting in discussing
the Ebay side of this argument", seemingly blissfully ignorant the two are
intertwined and inescapable.