From: Dr Zoidberg on
"petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.25328b1af453a28398989d(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
> In article <ha9qmv$kj7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Dr Zoidberg
>> There seems to be something about your posts that stops them "quoting"
>> normally.
>
> Very odd, everything loks okay my end.
>

And this time it was just fine.

I've had it happen on several people's posts , not just yours.
I think it started to be more common when I swapped to
news.eternal-september.....
--
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away"

From: The Older Gentleman on
Dr Zoidberg <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:

> Lets see , everyone who thinks that's the case , raise their hands.....

<Tucks both hands firmly into pockets>


--
BMW K1100LT & K100RS Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple
Suzuki TS250ER Yamaha XS250 Damn, back to seven bikes!
Try Googling before asking a damn silly question.
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: Fran on

"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in
message news:ha9qmv$kj7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
> "petrolcan" <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.25327d29646f4760989899(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> I laid myself open to spacker saying that I had ripped someone off? How
>> exactly did I do that then?
>
> By posting anything to this group :0)
>
>> Just for the record, it would be useful if you could sort your quoting
>> out just to make sure that you are not misinterpreted.
>
>
> There seems to be something about your posts that stops them "quoting"
> normally.
> I've had to manually add the >
>

Yes, I get that too, so I'm piggybacking on your post, rather than have to
fiddle about with the one by petrolcan. And it was not Spacker's reaction I
was referring to, it was the error by the buyer.


From: Fran on

"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in
message news:ha9qef$j2n$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
> "Fran" <usenet1304(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:ha9oiq$8l1$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>> you sold something that could easily have been used for fraud
>
> Lets be 100% clear on this.
> It was suggested that someone may buy the box to re-sell an unboxed camera
> as boxed , thereby increasing it's value.
> You have pointed out that it wouldn't be the same box that the camera was
> originally sold in , and you think that that is misrepresenting things.
>
> Are you now saying that that would be fraud?
> Yes or no answer please.
>

Yes.


From: petrolcan on
In article <2m2hc5ddtjp7escu9h9k859tjq3nagog22(a)4ax.com>, Spacker says...
>
> petrolcan <petrolcanSPAM(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> >> But why did you keep the buyer's
> >> money when you became aware of their "mistake"?
> >
> >Two things here:
> >
> >1. The buyer admitted their mistake and told me to keep the money as it
> >wasn't an expensive lesson.
> >
> >2. How are you so sure that I have not issued a refund?
> >
>
> You would have said you had refunded it even though the buyer said to
> keep it. That would have put you in a good light, and be evidence that
> you were just foolish in thinking an empty box was an appropriate item
> for ebay.

A good light? What, you mean you might think more of me? I really don't
care about your opinion.