eBay

fineinteriors1 · ‎04-02-2024

I had to stop selling on eBay because the woke employees steel my money in favor of a convicted thief and burglar. He stole two of my items ($145.00) and eBay stole my money and gave it to him. After 24 years with eBay they crapped all over me. Another BUD LIGHT?

chapeau-noir · ‎04-03-2024

@fineinteriors1 wrote:
No, It was two medalist reels sold to z wheet. He scammed eBay and me. Sent back two reels I never seen in my life and he kept the two I sent him and then eBay gave him the money back too. I'm out two reels and $about 150.00 cash because eBay employs woke weeklings. The tracking proves everything. I even signed an affidavit with photos per Ebay's request and they still screwed me. Now I have to get a lawyer involved. It's all **bleep** Seller protection is a myth. The co is going down hill fast and they take from good sellers and give too crooks.

A massive corporation 'stealing' from an individual isn't 'woke' - it's dirty capitalism. Woke people will name and shame that.

Congratulations, you are Woke.

“The illegal we do immediately, the unconstitutional takes a little longer.” - Henry Kissinger

"Wherever law ends, tyranny begins" -John Locke

reallynicestamps · ‎04-03-2024

The poorer the spelling the greater the paranoia.

jameshen1 · ‎04-03-2024

@reallynicestamps wrote:
The poorer the spelling the greater the paranoia.

This is so true!!

mr_lincoln · ‎04-03-2024

Hi @fineinteriors1

Your account goes back to December of 1999, well, I'm impressed ... now on to business. I see your listings state that you don't accept returns but I would assume as a long-time member you know eBay has several return reasons that trump the No returns accepted setting. I am against using it as a general return policy, I think it has its place for two of eBay's Grading choices in their Item specifics ... they would be:

-Junk value - parts only

-Restoration required

I also see that your FB history is showing 100%, that's a good thing. For myself I've had a few bogus returns over the years but at the end of the day they are few compared to overall sales on the venue, part of doing business. And to that point, it is business, not personal. I switched to offering 30 day Free returns years ago and it was nice to have Seller protections in place when Buyers tried to take advantage of the system ... I am thankful that has been rare. I am sure you are familiar with these: Seller protections | eBay

Regards,
Mr. Lincoln - Community Mentor

brightlightbookseller · ‎04-03-2024

That's not capitalism either, not in the slightest. It's better known as corporatism.

1786davycrockett · ‎04-03-2024

@robbie31415

"If you think hiring should be based on physical characteristics over capability I don't know what to tell you."

Frankly, that is not what I wrote, nor what I intended to mean.

Furthermore, up until the late 1960s, many employers actually did "think hiring should be based on physical characteristics over capability" -- they passed up many qualified employees of other races, based simply on prejudice.

Or the employers hired over-qualified individuals of color, but for menial positions.

I am all for hiring the most qualified individuals for ANY position; however, I regularly see very qualified and intelligent individuals of color routinely passed over for positions that are ultimately filled by individuals who can't spell, can't write, and who are grammatically and intellectually ignorant -- but who are most definitely of a paler complexion.

Yes, there should be a level playing field for all of us.

But we're not there yet.

itsjustasprain · ‎04-03-2024

@fineinteriors1 wrote:
I'm out two reels and $about 150.00 cash because eBay employs woke weeklings.

@fineinteriors1 : Once again - because dodging the question is not going to work for you: What is your understanding of what 'woke' means?

ten_o_nine · ‎04-03-2024

@oldwestgold

My previous response was intended to provide guidance, rather than accuse or attack the OP.

robbie31415 · ‎04-03-2024

The point is in the past, and what they did needs to be left behind. I said "fake merit" of the past, which would imply that I agree merit wasn't used properly.

I believe merit should be the only factor. Job applications should be blind to all characteristics.

The amusing thing is the woke outlook is to repeat the past in the opposite fashion: that people should be hired based on characteristics rather than merit.

I'm sorry, but if I need surgery, I want my surgeon to be hired based on being the most qualified and best for the job, not for reasons of some DEI program to make people feel good about showing inclusiveness.

gone.c-33 · ‎04-03-2024

@robbie31415 wrote:
The point is in the past, and what they did needs to be left behind. I said "fake merit" of the past, which would imply that I agree merit wasn't used properly.

I believe merit should be the only factor. Job applications should be blind to all characteristics.

The amusing thing is the woke outlook is to repeat the past in the opposite fashion: that people should be hired based on characteristics rather than merit.

I'm sorry, but if I need surgery, I want my surgeon to be hired based on being the most qualified and best for the job, not for reasons of some DEI program to make people feel good about showing inclusiveness.

The problem with that is that oftentimes, unconscious biases blur the lines and some people who are more qualified are passed over because of their difference.

A common instance of that would be someone looking at resumes and quickly discard those from people with a “non American” sounding name or a female name before even getting to the qualifications, work history and education parts.

DEI works at getting helping people getting rid of of their biases and ensuring people from other communities are actually being considered.

robbie31415 · ‎04-03-2024

DEI doesn't though.

The entire design of DEI is to take ones physical characteristics and put them above merit in order to meet quotas.

It isn't about organically seeing the increase of diverse qualified candidates.

I worked for one of the largest corporations in the world. Did some hiring and had to deny most qualified candidates because they felt the current hires were characteristically lopsided.

Sad to deny someone employment because they don't look a certain way.

Was powered by a woke DEI.

itsjustasprain · ‎04-03-2024

@gone.c-33 wrote:
@robbie31415 wrote:
I'm sorry, but if I need surgery, I want my surgeon to be hired based on being the most qualified and best for the job, not for reasons of some DEI program to make people feel good about showing inclusiveness.
The problem with that is that oftentimes, unconscious biases blur the lines and some people who are more qualified are passed over because of their difference.

I would view the desired goal as ensuring that everyone has a chance to qualify for the career they want to pursue. That does not mean free certification as a surgeon. It means everyone has an equal chance to get in the door.

gurlcat · ‎04-03-2024

@robbie31415 wrote:

I believe merit should be the only factor. Job applications should be blind to all characteristics.

I doubt you could find a single person who would disagree with those two statements, at least out loud. The problem is, what SHOULD happen flies out the window when people in charge of hiring do carry prejudices and discriminate accordingly. Sure there are laws against it but it's virtually impossible to prove why you weren't hired for a position -you rarely even get a call to let you know that you didn't get it, never mind why. If they did say why it would just be "we picked the most qualified person" but you would usually not know anything about who they picked or what their qualifications were.

I did get a glimpse of this once, though. In the early 90's I was a nurse's assistant working at a nursing home. When a new one opened up in town, some of us were interested in working there. When I went for an application the RN who was also in charge of hiring handed me the app, and without even knowing anything about me, asked when I'd be available to come in for an interview. I answered and she told me to just bring the completed app with me then. The next time I was at work I excitedly told my coworkers, and one of them was immediately upset. -She was a black woman in her early 30's, sweetest gal you ever met, had been a CNA at least a few years and was EXCELLENT at it; everybody loved her and she never called in sick, etc. Meanwhile I was 18, had barely worked there 6 months or so, wasn't even certified yet, and if I'm honest it was just a job to me, whereas this woman really loved the patients. Reason she was upset with my news -you can probably guess. She had gone to the new place the day after I was there, and that nurse told her all the positions were filled but she could have an application if she wanted to put one "on file". I felt awful and decided not to go to that interview.

Believe it or don't, identity prejudice is alive and well in America. And it doesn't even take seeing the job-seeker in-person to discriminate, because even just a name on paper can tell you if it's a man or woman, and sometimes race. -Some horrific data has come from experiments where fake applications were submitted online to employers, with names like Shanika and Demarcus alongside Meghan and Brad.

So what do you do about employers who (secretly) don't agree that merit should be the only factor, and it's hard to prove discrimination after the fact? I get how gross mandated "quotas" seem, but usually the minimum required DEI positions are a small quantity compared to the local demographics, so it's not even like the employers get forced to have a workforce that is anything close to reflective of the community; they just can't be blatantly, obviously racist, sexist, etc. And of course they can still have qualification requirements, so it's not like they're going to hand a scalpel to a 1st year med student to do your surgery. Come on man.