Amazon Seller Suck

[sammyammy2000]

I ordered a CD for my son from a seller by the name of Bargains At Bywoods on Amazon.  I waited several weeks and the CD didn't show up.

I contacted the seller and they told me that they had a problem with the postal service being slow on delivery.  I ordered things from other sellers the same day and received them quickly.  The seller told me to

Comments

[rpg_goddess]

I really don't understand why the mod tagged this as "customer shouldn't always get what they want" WTF... I can see "you gotta speak up" being used since they waited several weeks to a month to contact the seller... But wtf on attacking the OP in the tags? I don't see any customer suck here that warrants that tag.

I have sold many things via ebay and similar and ALWAYS use delivery confirmation. I prefer to ship usps because its generally cheaper than ups. I always email my buyers the same day I ship with their tracking information.

The seller either is trying to scam or is just a complete moron if they dont know you can request delivery confirmation on usps shipments.... /rolls eyes.

Sorry this happened to you and your son. Thanks for the heads up on this bad seller.

[stayintru2me]

From what I recall (and from glancing through other tagged posts), I've always taken "Customer shouldn't always get what they want" not to mean that "no you're being unreasonable and you shouldn't get that" but that the service provider just isn't giving the customer what they want. If you look through the posts tagged that way you see situations where customers were asked to pay for products that are unavailable or where they didn't get what they ordered/requested. I don't think it's an attack on the OP at all.

[aithyne]

It's a sarcastic tag.

[theflyers]

Please note that the mods aren't the only ones who can tag entries, so blame shouldn't be placed on them.

[derbysinner]

actually, I did the tagging - I'll take the blame for this wildly-off-base accusation

[theflyers]

Hahaha, well then I stand corrected!

[butterbuns]

The tag's about the customer not getting the product/service they want/deserve.

And attacking the OP? Pfft.

[derbysinner]

Okay, I know you're not THAT new to the comm (since I've personally applied many a tag to your posts), so either:

a) you haven't been paying attention to the tags up until just this second

or

b) you're jumping on the anti-tags bandwagon just to be cool

Why not click on the link and check out some of the other posts to which that tag has been applied? Do you want to accuse us of "attacking" in those, too?

[darsynia]

I actually always thought that tag got used when commenters got shorty, lol. Definitely not a tag directed at the OP!

[derbysinner]

I also like to apply it when the situation is completely ridiculous - like this one - http://community.livejournal.com/bad_service/2246426.html

it's making fun of the situation, not making fun of the OP - we have plenty of other tags for that :P

[darsynia]

Bah, *shirty. I blame my iPod and the baby I'd had on my lap... *shifty eyes*

But yes. Exactly!

[rpg_goddess]

so ok I give you that maybe attacking wasn't the right word to use, but from what I've seen, it seems to be used in cases where there is significant customer suck or wank, like my post, the beans guy, etc. I've been here about 3 weeks maybe, so excuse me for not properly understanding the tags. I was just making an off hand remark (almost like thinking aloud) that I thought it was an odd tag to use on this post. anyways wasn't accusing anyone, just more like wtf but apparently my bad :) carry on.

[m03m]

Think of it as a description of what's happening, not an opinion. Does that help?