Seller Cancels Auction Sale After Item is Paid for. / Bargains Depend entirely on Goodwill Part 2.

[ra157]

On 26 Dec 2018, I got a nice auction win on a mini-monocular. I paid for it on Paypal. The seller then immediately caneclled the order on Paypal and refunded my money. I sent a message to the seller asking why, and I got no response. I then complained to Ebay.

Ebay advised that the auction was cancelled at PayPal, and that I should not worry about the extremely annoying "Unpaid Item" that is still listed against the item in My Ebay Summary

I just left a Negative rating.

As per my previous thread of very similar title, I am of the opinion that Ebay should ban sellers that engage in such a practice for life.
Regards,
Renato

[countessalmirena]

One position on which you and I both agree, though, ra157, is not believing in karma.

(If it did, there'd be no need for humankind to intervene in cases of injustice or criminal behaviour or the very notion of vengeance. We'd simply understand that the universe would take care of it when someone injures or hurts us or does something wrong.)

[collect247]

Hi 4Channel,

I'll agree that people that behave well, generally are more likely to be treated well and have better lives, than people who behave poorly. 

---

I beg to differ as people who behave poorly more than not get away with it and people who are well behaved and honest and kind get the short straw although less than expected but it does happen.

[countessalmirena]

crow, I've certainly seen that happen. (And from what I've gleaned, you have some in-depth experience of the short straw.)

I suppose it depends on the various aspects of the person with the poor behaviour. If it's a powerful person with money and influence, the poor behaviour could be got away with because other people are afraid to hold the person accountable - or they might want that person's influence or money (which they wouldn't get if they crossed the person).

If it's a charming person who can manipulate emotions with the best of them, one can end up feeling guilty for holding him/her accountable for the behaviour... or be fooled into trusting the person on the basis of the charm. These are also the people who are perhaps the most convincing at saying sorry even when there's no real compunction.

Sometimes people behaving poorly get away with it simply because of the sheer brazenness of it! Other people might react to it with "Don't say anything to him/her, or we'll never hear the end of it" or "You can't make him/her listen, so just let it go" or some such thing.

Some kind and honest people are taken dreadful advantage of. Often such people are simply not the type to fight back. And of course fighting back on every little thing is wearying and pointless and ultimately stressful... Perhaps it comes down to picking your battles, based on what is important and what is not sufficiently important for a battle. In major issues, having the evidence, stamina, and courage to fight an injustice and/or loss will probably make the difference between success and failure - although even then, sometimes one ends up faced with a ruling or outcome that is unjust and illogical.

[4channel]

---

@ra157 wrote:

---

@4channel wrote:

---

---

Yes ra157, that's what it's all about. Being straight with the buyer and  seller taking responsibility for an error if one is made.  There's also another angle to all this as well. Some few might call it selfish in a way but I am a believer in karma, and doing the right thing does bring back good fortune later on down the track.

---

Hi 4Channel,
            Thanks for that, but it has finally happened - we disagree on something.
I don't believe in Karma.
I'll agree that people that behave well, generally are more likely to be treated well and have better lives, than people who behave poorly. But history and current backward governments around the world and people involved with criminal enetrprises show that people can behave abysmally and appallingly, and still wind up with wealth and in great postions of power.
To my mind, that tends to disprove Karma.
Regards,
Renato

---

Hi ra157, yes my friend, it surprises me that we disagree on something as I thought with your old-school solid ethics on trading, you would be a firm believer in Karma. I guess it's just down to you having a good set or morals, a fair sense of play and a decent person.

Totally right about criminal enterprises and goverments and those participants in vile activities ending up in great positions of power. Does that disprove Karma?  Hmmm, at first it may seem to be. OK, take the political leaders today that serve their wealthy masters at the expense of the common everyday man and woman. What may their punishment be? Well, their children would not be very nice people as the main role model in a child's upbringing is their parent. So therefore their children would most likely not be very nice. Could that be their punishment?  Or if by chance the children end up being decent human beings and despise their corrupt parent, could that then be their punishment?

[k1ooo-slr-sales]

---

@4channel wrote:

---

@ra157 wrote:

---

@4channel wrote:

---

---

Some few might call it selfish in a way but I am a believer in karma . . . . . . . . 

---

Hi 4Channel,
            Thanks for that, but it has finally happened - we disagree on something.
I don't believe in Karma.

---

Hi ra157, yes my friend, it surprises me that we disagree on something as I thought with your old-school solid ethics on trading, you would be a firm believer in Karma.

---

don’t panic 4channel, I too find it difficult to believe that you and ra157 disagree on something.

Spoiler

but for a different reason to what you posted

Spoiler

ya see . . . . . . . for some time I believed that you and ra157 were the same person

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

on another matter of unfinished business, I am still waiting for shoppingbag to show themselves on this thread again 

Spoiler

their absence has been conspicuous considering the very strong stance they took when they last posted on this thread!

Spoiler

maybe their absence is due them realising their position was not able to be justified

[digital*ghost]

---

@countessalmirena wrote:

(If it did, there'd be no need for humankind to intervene in cases of injustice or criminal behaviour or the very notion of vengeance. We'd simply understand that the universe would take care of it when someone injures or hurts us or does something wrong.)

---

This presumes the consequences of criminal (or just "bad") behaviour, and the dealing of karma, to be purely in the vein of visible legal justice, or even of the poetic variety, but the traditional concept of karma encompasses a much broader scope of reward and suffering. It could also be argued that our criminal justice system is a tool of karma, rather than the justice system exists because karma doesn't. 

Suffering is not limited to physical circumstances, of course, and I can't imagine anyone who amasses great wealth and power through causing the suffering of others is truly living a happy, care-free life, even if it doesn't end in visible, vindicating tears. 

JMHO, Karma itself is possibly a construct similar to the good ol' "everything happens for a reason", a salve to comfort those who would like to see certain people get their comeuppance but never do in the way one would like. Especially because it involves the idea of karma carrying over from or to previous / future lives, i.e. a way to say "I will have my vengeance they will suffer the consequences of their behaviour, in this life or the next". 

[countessalmirena]

Spoiler

It is merely a very small subset, but in any interpretation in which the universe balances things, a personal vengeance hasn't a logical place (in my view). It can of course be argued that personal vengeance is a function or manifestation of karma; nevertheless, I argue that a belief which involves the highest and best outcome being good deeds and enlightenment which are contrary to personal vengeance cannot logically function.

I suppose we have all seen that sometimes good deeds lead to bad outcomes. Suffering through repeated iteration does not make sense to me as a method of increasing closeness to enlightenment.

I don't think the universe balances things. That needn't necessarily mean that there isn't a balancing, but looking at the universe as a closed universe bound by observable laws where E = mc², it would preclude a natural karma (if we suppose that karma is natural).

Presuming that justice as we understand it (perhaps we'd call it natural justice?) is itself a foreshadowing or reflection or vague type of something which is much bigger and truer than justice, it brings some of the most important questions about reality... about the nature of what "universe" means, and whether a closed system is compatible with some of humanity's oldest beliefs as well as observed phenomena. That presupposition isn't and can't be an argument, because it's a base upon which to construct an argument.

I do believe that humans ought to pursue integrity and "good" behaviour because goodness is definable and measurable against something that isn't natural. If it were, it too would be subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. But ... it is clearly not a universal belief. There are plenty of highly intelligent people who have a different measure and a different stance entirely, to whom evil is merely a matter of perspective and even to be prized in its own context (à la Milton's Satan).

The point you make about someone whose wealth and power was gained through the suffering of others not being happy is something to think about. I suspect that the human ability to rewrite events from one's own perspective takes away much (perhaps all) guilt in many cases. There's the truism about hating the one that you've injured...

❝Proprium humani ingenii est odisse quem laeseris.❞ - Agricola [42], Tacitus.

He was on to something.

And like you, Tacitus doesn't give much credience to the "visible, vindicating tears" (lovely phrase!).

Oh! And you remember that at one point we touched on the matter of empathy...? It is a curious phenomenon, to see a person in whom no softness is touched; even worse, to see a person who gains pleasure through the suffering of others.

Oh well... None of this is getting the seller who refused to complete the transaction tossed into a dungeon complete with comfy chair.

[springyzone]

---

@countessalmirena wrote:

One position on which you and I both agree, though, ra157, is not believing in karma.

(If it did, there'd be no need for humankind to intervene in cases of injustice or criminal behaviour or the very notion of vengeance. We'd simply understand that the universe would take care of it when someone injures or hurts us or does something wrong.)

---

Karma (as people most commonly use the term these days, to mean that what goes around, comes around) is just the atheist version of heaven & hell.

Only difference between them (& talking of the modern, casual use of the word, not the ancient meaning) is a lot of people who use the term karma, believe if someone does the wrong thing, they will eventually suffer some sort of payback here on earth, while the concept of heaven & hell says there will be rewards & punishments for behaviour but they may not come till the next life. Which is somewhat similar to the original meaning of karma, too.

Me-I think it all comes down to the concept of fairness, which I believe most humans long for and the idea of karma or heaven/hell helps bring comfort to the mind.

Do I believe in either? Not as such. I think often people do get away with doing bad things. If they are rich or powerful or both, even more so.

Every society has laws or rules of some kind to try to keep that society in a state of order, and it does work to a reasonable extent, but as we all know, the law isn't always 100% fair or even handed either. 

But I do believe that on the whole, those who respect others, who are polite or pleasant, who try to live honest lives, who treat others kindly, will in turn be respected and loved.

And that those who are cruel, vicious & unfair to others may be obeyed out of fear, but they won't necessarily be loved or respected, so people will turn on them if & when they think they can get away with it.

There are a lot of wrongs in the world that will never end up being righted & a lot of bad actions that will never be punished, while some others will be, but we'll never know which is which till we try. Don't leave it to karma to get them.

[davewil1964]

 I suspect that the human ability to rewrite events from one's own perspective takes away much (perhaps all) guilt in many cases.

Unless they are psycho- or sociopaths. Then there won't be any guilt to assuage, or empathy to confuse them.

[countessalmirena]

---

@davewil1964 wrote:

 I suspect that the human ability to rewrite events from one's own perspective takes away much (perhaps all) guilt in many cases.

Unless they are psycho- or sociopaths. Then there won't be any guilt to assuage, or empathy to confuse them.

---

Yes, there are always those exceptions. Psychopaths make up a surprisingly large percentage of the population, too - between 0.2% and 2.5% - and they are notoriously prone to recidivism if they finagle their way out of punishment...