Took a look at the neg. The buyer was matter-of-fact in his tone, did not resort to name-calling or veiled jabs. He outlined his concerns and it did not sound embellished. He sounds credible.
Your response immediately points out that he is a zero feedback buyer, as if that explains his untrustworthiness. Then you further call his veracity into question as if the “claim” has no merit, before finally just stooping to name-call. The overall tone is angry, defiant and defensive. Not the impression one wants to leave behind for future potential buyers to read. They are the audience that matters—not the disgruntled former buyer.
Things can happen in transit. New Old Stock doesn’t always perform and the lures were in sealed packages where they couldn't be easily tested. So i don’t think that it was unreasonable to suggest the items might be non-functioning. Not every buyer with an issue is a scammer.
When the buyer contacted you, only to be greeted with skepticism and disbelief that he was anything but a scammer after a 14.99 NOS freebie, then i am not surprised he “cut bait” (no pun intended) and didn’t bother returning the items, and instead aired his grievances in Feedback.
