I was picturing a woman with a lot of makeup and an affected smile typing loudly, measured. You know she can type twice that fast, but she knows everybody stopped to listen.

Most people only have access to that via websites, so checking a new password by transmitting it to a third party would be the worst thing they could do.

The argument that oppression is necessarily derived from fear is weak and falls down on analysis. Fear tends to result in withdrawal, not aggression. The flight response is vastly stronger in humans than the fight response.

It seems improbable that you can fight hatred by accusing it of being fear. It also seams improbable that you can win an argument by misrepresenting the intentions of the other side. Though I do understand, people assigned "male" at birth have a strong tendency to argue passive-aggressively by claiming the other person is weak.

It's hard to make an argument that people should respect each other by disrespecting people who currently disagree. Future development of respect then becomes increasingly unlikely the more you argue with them.

Probably because people assigned "male" at birth are much more likely to harm others when they're older than persons assigned "female" at birth. So regardless of where you align on the other issues you should be able to see that people with concerns about harm are going to focus on that.

Adding presumptive pejoratives all over the place just makes you hypocrite, which isn't a strong place to argue from.

Apparently the good buyers and sellers, which is why so many people have a positive view of it and it is a thriving business even with a lot of competition.

It sounds like you wanted to "round up" on your descriptions. Again, I've only heard your side of the story. And you don't sound like you have a legitimate grievance. You sound like you overcharged and the item was returned. All they get is their money back, and they're returning the item. They don't gain anything. Charging a boatload of money for shipping isn't because you're deserving of extra money, you're supposed to spend it on the packing materials and the time to pack it carefully.

Your story is an example of why I'm a happy ebay buyer. And there's a lot of us.

I've spent a few thousand on ebay in the past year, probably 30 items purchased, and the only item I had a problem with was a $10 used chisel that had a slight unreported bend in it.

You do have to carefully evaluate sellers and look at the listings with a skeptical eye, there's lots of things that I wanted to buy but didn't because I didn't trust it. 99% positive feedback might sound good, but it's actually horrible.

A couple years ago I bought a bunch of used vinyl albums and I had better results with ebay sellers than with the big music resale sites.

If the negative comments people are making here were true, very few of the items I purchased would have been for sale there.

And yet, it's the go-to place for vintage tool collectors. Many of the items are rather expensive. And the camera and gear market is also very active with a lot of valuable items.

You were "0 for 3" but there may be more to the story. Perhaps you were inexperienced with the items you were selling and you genuinely mislabeled the condition. Or you thought it was ok to just take pictures of the good angles and not the problem. Or you were selling something weird, like the other guy complaining that software was opened and returned.

And how do you get "ripped off?" The actual problem with an abusive buyer is they make an unreasonable demand and threaten you with a bad review. That's what the dispute resolution is for.

And then there's the "repeat that over and over again." Does that match up with an "0 for 3?"

Are there abusive buyers? Yes, but very few. This is apparent to anybody who reads a seller's negative feedback before buying anything.

However, there are many more abusive sellers than abusive buyers. And you sound like one of them, based on your own version of events. Presumably it was actually the negative feedback dragging your rating down that caused you to be "losing money." It's hard to lose money though, normally you'd merely not make enough.

I don't think used computers or software is actually even a normal use for ebay. Normally it is for collectibles, out of print books and music, vintage tools, etc. Things you would otherwise buy at a yard sale.

If somebody usually sells trading cards and then offers up a cheap laptop there's a good chance their local pawn shops didn't want it or offered less and it's actually their old personal computer. Not sure why that would be assumed to be a scam item. Used computers have high supply and low demand, if you're not running a resale business there can be a big difference between the "going price" that businesses with a lot of stock can get and the price that will actually get it off your hands without any marketing effort. It's the same for camera gear; if the price of a lens is too low and the seller is a camera dealer I know it's junk, but if most of their items are trading cards they probably just want to get rid of it without spending time and effort learning the market.

The funniest tell in your comment is the word "alley."

I don't understand your point. Are you saying we are a post-scarcity society, or that we're not?

Wait, you're one of the scam sellers that ebay protected people from?! See, this is why I trust ebay, and why if they were under new management they'd have to win my trust all over again!

That would be good analogy except that Sears was actually also failing.

I loved Sears, and I miss them. After Wards closed they were my go-to. However, the last few times I shopped there I did notice that parking was especially easy, and the store was not at all crowded. Both of which seemed convenient at the time, but less so in retrospect.

No, ebay is dispute resolution.

Are there abusive buyers that some sellers have a legit gripe with? Yes. But is that what holds back used sales? Is there a big backlog of valuable vintage goods that aren't offered on the market because of fraudulent buyers? I'm gonna call bullshit on that, estate sales will move forwards regardless of current market value.

The actual thing holding back the market is the opposite; abusive sellers. "Mint" condition that is actually garbage. Trust in ebay's dispute resolution vastly increases the number of purchases made. If they were trusted more there would be more sales; if they were trusted (by buyers) there would be less sales. It's really that simple. There is an excess of used goods that exist in the world. and also an excess of dishonest sellers of used goods. A market is created by trust between the buyer and the dispute-resolver.

Yeah but they gotta do it first, before the offer can be presented to ebay shareholders. Otherwise ebay's board tells them to kick rocks. They can't force a vote with a handful of wishes, they can only promise what they actually have to offer.

I highly doubt any bank is gonna offer them $16b in hopes and wishes. If a bank does so and ends up with both, they still lost $16b. That's actually a noticeable amount of money, even to a bank.

So you're trying to convince the good people (sic) of Slashdot that you believe $20b and $36b to be equal?

They need the numbers to work before the ebay investors are tasked with voting on the deal; not after.

Liar liar, pants on fire!