Acceptable gradations of deceit
EScott83
Posts: 90 ✭✭✭
Opinions please!
As a newbie to this forum and future seller on Ebay I've received an amazing education about a couple things. One of which is there appears to be a level of intentionally misleading (fraudulent?) activity by Ebay sellers that's considered acceptable by buyers. It seems that certain consumers feel the just-for-profit practice of sellers baiting an Ebay ad with an intentionally misleading title or primary image and placing the responsibility of digging deep enough to find the truth onto the consumer is an acceptable practice. I think it may be called not too terribly fraudulent.
I'm wondering where the line in the sand is for others?
I'm curious of opinions, for example, in the following two ads: Do you think it is or isn't acceptable to use the same primary ad image, use different secondary ad images then state "THE FOUR ROLLS IN THE PICTURE ARE THE FOUR ROLLS YOU WILL RECEIVE"?
Also, do you think it is or isn't acceptable to intentionally use the the bait title (we know it's intentional because the coin is defined in the body of the ad for what it actually is, which could've easily been but wasn't posted in the title) in the following ad and (likely intentionally) profit from placing the responsibility of knowledge on the consumer (aka fishing for a sucker)?
Ultimately my first question is: Do you feel, as a numismatic collector and consumer, it's acceptable for an Ebay (or any) seller to intentionally mislead or withhold known information from consumers in the spirit of personal financial greed and intentionally place the responsibility of finding truth on the consumer?
My second question is: As an Ebay numismatic collector do you/have you ever tracked a sellers alleged sales (through tracking the ad) then compared it to their feedback?
My third question is: As an Ebay numismatic consumer do you find "private auctions" to be a red flag (as it eliminates the ability to perform the action in my second question)?
Thanks for any and all opinions!
Comments
Crooks abound and we all know this. Your best defense is knowledge.
eBay should also be responsible for these regular acts of deception . The roll thing is old and for some reason some folks fall for it. Yes it’s wrong and has been pointed out on several occasions but somehow continues. This problem is not only with coins but just about everything of any value.
Joe
I had to lookup the definition.
Definitions: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offense-definitions
Fraud-The intentional perversion of the truth for the purpose of inducing another person or other entity in reliance upon it to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right. Fraudulent conversion and obtaining of money or property by false pretenses. Confidence games and bad checks, except forgeries and counterfeiting, are included.
It is NOT acceptable to lie. Period. The stock image is fine if it is labeled as a stock image. The fact that they say you will get exactly those 4 rolls and will not is not acceptable. [It is also a dumb lie in this case as using a stock photo wouldn't change anything.]
The 55 is less obviously deceptive since it clearly indicates "poor man's DD" in the text. Now, technically, it is NOT a DDO as the poor man's doubled die is not actually a doubled die. However, it is frequently referred to, inaccurately, that way. So, I would suggest it should NOT be done, but is not "fraud" or "fraudulent" in the legal sense.
When you get tired of this topic, please spend some time ranting about "New and Improved" laundry detergent not being either. You might also spend some time on political forums calling out everyone for their "spin".
There is a line between hype and fraud. It is not always exactly clear where that line may lie.
For example, in your roll example, an original bank wrapped box would have 20 rolls in it. The seller could well have 20 "identical" rolls. [Although the odds of them all being tails/tails is small.] There is no advantage, frankly, to the stock photo. It doesn't even really count as hype as those could well be 20 original bank wrapped tail/tail rolls. BUT, IF IF IF those tail/tail rolls came out of a box and the box is clearly 1957 coins and the seller is hiding that fact...well, we have no passed well into hype and probably heading for fraud although people will differ on whether it is severe enough to constitute fraud.
Now, the 55 DDO is the tougher case. It is definitely hype. But, go look at the number of "RARE" coin listings. 99.9999999% of coins are not rare. CC dollars? Not rare. S-VDB cents. Not rare. 55 Doubled Die cents? Not rare. Is the seller trying to get you to look at his DDO by making you think it is THE DDO? Yes. Clearly hype. But to be fraud, he'd have to be hiding the fact that it is the poor man's doubled die, which he is not. The coin is VERY CLEARLY pictured and the text explains what it is. I doubt many people would suggest that constitutes fraud. It is akin to running a Classified Ad selling "Rare Walking Liberty Half $s".
I think what leads to your questions is the fact that many of the fishy/misleading/ambiguous auctions still have buyers - happy buyers by checking the sellers feedback. That's still a mystery to many of us, but why its important to get a basic education in whatever you're buying. And another reason to do a lot of reading on this forum.
(and use the search feature for lots of coin research and opinions.)
Buyer beware.
There's a reason that eBay's official corporate motto is "Caveat Emptor".
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
There are plenty of non-hyping honest dealers on eBay. The trick is to sort out those who are not.
Even good people work with a little different set of ethics. Rotten folks seemingly have none at all. The most susceptible victims are usually those who are trying to get something for nothing. That's just how the world is. Fraud and deceit are pretty prevalent today.
Is cherry picking fraudulent? We often celebrate "scores and rips" here, but in essence the victorious party is taking advantage of another's ignorance. Not disclosing every little tick and spot on a coin when selling.... is that OK or not? Not disclosing that it recently upgraded or failed to get a sticker..... Discovering silver bars in the back yard and then not trying to locate the previous owner - is that fraudulent?
Be nice, don't cheat, don't steal, don't lie. eBay started with a phenomenal idea but much of it has faded to a lawless swamp where the buyer is always right and the seller is always wrong. Even when you can prove fraudulent activity, the time required to run it down is often a losing proposition.
Just remember, nobody is looking out for you but you.
I with santinidollar: for every EBay crook there's an honest seller out there somewhere. Don't judge all by the few.