I'm bad!!!!

[panocho]

So, knowing the guy isnt knowledgable in this area you lied to him about it and find that funny?

I agree with Mitica: funny is the least you can find it. And this, being benevolent and putting a little sense of humor to it.

Otherwise... how in the world can someone ask thousands of dollars for something he is just not knowledgable about? I mean, if you don't know the value of something you don't just go and ask that money for it, right?

And then, his reaction to Mitica's made-up question was not to take it as a simple question, as it was (funny or serious, doesn't matter), but simply to add it as a given fact, as a piece of information about the valuable camera, something that would confirm the thousands, if not add even an extra value to it!!:shock: what a face!

so, if one doesn't take it as a funny thing, then i think it is simply because one would regard it more seriously. and by seriously here i don't mean just not-funny...

 

[usayit]

The value of any item is the amount a particular buyer is willing to pay for it. In that sense.. there's no such thing as a rip off... just uninformed buyers.

If the seller is intentionally misleading or scamming the buyer, then thats a rip off.

My buddy which refer to as "Ebay guru" once sold a piece of drift wood for $80 bucks. yeh.. it looked nice and was bleached white. It was marketed as an item to decorate a fish tank...

 

[Moxi]

OK, so you're not knowledgeable and you want to sell something on Ebay. You have no idea how much it's worth and you make up a price. Say, the item is worth $2.00 and you want to sell it for $10,000.00... Isn't that a rip off? Whether he is knowledgeable or not? IMHO, if you don't know how much it's worth you ask around, you inform yourself, you research it.

And yes, I find poking fun at people trying to rip off other people funny. Should I have remorses instead, in your opinion?

Poking fun means you poke fun, ie. talk about it to your friends as you do here on the forums. It doesnt mean you take advantage of his ignorance and lie to him. He obviously isnt knowledgable in the field, but you are. Which makes what he did ignorant, and what you did wrong.
Remorse? No, its not that big of a deal.
Just my 2.

 

[Mitica100]

Sorry Moxi, I just don't see it that way. But you're entitled to your opinion, that's why this is called a Forum.

Peace now.

 

[panocho]

Poking fun means you poke fun, ie. talk about it to your friends as you do here on the forums. It doesnt mean you take advantage of his ignorance and lie to him. He obviously isnt knowledgable in the field, but you are. Which makes what he did ignorant, and what you did wrong.
Remorse? No, its not that big of a deal.
Just my 2.

I don't see it that way either. To me it is clear, and Mitica did perfectly allright. Why? Well, let's just focus on a little "detail": when Mitica ASKS whether the camera is a unique collector's edition, he first answers (eloquently enough!) "very interesting" and then he goes and adds to the description of the camera the CLAIM that IT IS a collector's edition!! Do you really think that that is purely a result of inocent ignorance...?

Otherwise, I do get your point and think you'd be right if another one were the case. But I really think this one in particular is not, and thus I really second Mitica's decission...

...but you could and probably will ask: and how in the world could Mitica know that in advance? Well, then I would say that he obviously couldn't know, but precisely for that reason his inocent question (whether he made it for fun or not is not really the point, since outwardly seen, it might as well have been a question seriously made, so his intention was probably not inocent, but the question was!) was a clever way to find out whether the seller was honest and ignorant or perhaps ignorant, yes, but definitely no honest at all.

It's true that we shouldn't laugh at someone's ignorance, but making fun is the least one could do on someone's dishonesty, I think.

 

[Don Simon]

Yeah I might have more sympathy if the guy had replied "I don't know, is it a rare anniversary edition?" instead of putting that in the description...

Mitica, you are indeed bad. You should be deeply ashamed.
P.s. now ask him if this is the one famously owned by F.D.R. :mrgreen:

 

[blackdoglab]

Did the seller know that his camera (in fact that exact one) was used by Lee Harvey Oswald? (yes, it's a bad and tasteless joke.)

 

[Moxi]

I don't see it that way either. To me it is clear, and Mitica did perfectly allright. Why? Well, let's just focus on a little "detail": when Mitica ASKS whether the camera is a unique collector's edition,

In Mitica's original post he said he 'jokingly wrote to the guy saying that it could be an "Anniversary camera", which I totally made up.' I dont see where he ASKED whether it was or not.
No biggie really. My opinion differs from most and trust me, thats not so unusual.

 

[Don Simon]

Sure I wouldn't question your right to have a different opinion and actually you're right that the original post does seem to suggest that - but on the eBay link you can see that it was actually a question.

 

[terri]

You're exceedingly bad, Dimitri, which is why I adore you I'm sure.

Can't fault a seller for using this description: "rare anaversary [sic] vintage art deco Kodak junior six-20 folding camera" when it sounds so much better than "seller is clueless, doubtful that shutter works, and bellows probably have dry rot".

 

[panocho]

Sure I wouldn't question your right to have a different opinion and actually you're right that the original post does seem to suggest that - but on the eBay link you can see that it was actually a question.

yep


-though it is true that Mitica, as he says, was bad, since he did tell to us that other way!

 

[panocho]

My opinion differs from most and trust me, thats not so unusual.

hey, it's great that your opinion differs! otherwise we wouldn't be here writing to each other -which is definitely a good (and funny) thing to do

we all need someone to defend opinions different than ours. that forces us to sharpen our reasons and arguments -or just forget about them and join someone else's opinions.

and we need this always, not only in cases like this but also in others so absurd as people claiming that Canon's are the best cameras around :mrgreen:

 

[Mitica100]

and we need this always, not only in cases like this but also in others so absurd as people claiming that Canon's are the best cameras around :mrgreen:

What??? They are not? :lmao:


Wow!... This thread received much more attention than I intended. I'm a trouble maker by all means.

 

[blackdoglab]

Yeah, I see what you mean, pancho. I remember when I was starting out and had many a situation of being told that the only way to go was an auto-everything slr. Hey, I had only begun and didn't have a clue about fstop or anything else. I've never gone back to that place by the way.

 

[jwkwd]

I still think that it is funny. I am surprised that the seller did no research after finding that a product may be an "anniversary" model. Anniversary of what ? The entire art deco period from the 20's & 30's ? Kodak had how many models between it's start in 1892 and the 30's? The seller also has a 2C for buy it now in his other listings for $24.99, which, unless I can't see it, does not have any glass in the the lens.