bombadil wrote:I guess it's preferable to be snide and obvious about it?

No win situation: remember Kynan.

Yep, that's the auction I was referring to, as a Google search would've confirmed; but well remembered on that part of the history, Stephen. Still miffed if another seller's big-ticket auction suffered as a result in my absence despite the clear and obvious lack of quoted text referred to.

misterspock wrote:I thought the seller seemed familiar... In April of 2009, a Dwarven Glory was sold by the collectingwmaggie for $246. I'm not sure who the buyer was.

There's way more history than that, unfortunately. They've had genuine items but I've also forked out the best part of $100 in the past just to get photocopies they were selling out of circulation. WW is probably just about the worst publisher for anyone to be messing around with...
Not sure why I bothered, really, given that Maggie is still claiming they know nothing about what they're selling despite multiple assistance notes over several years, then willfully ignoring further questions when it presumably seemed like too much hassle for them to bother checking details despite potentially costing clueless buyers hundreds of dollars.

Anyhow... down to two days left. Any suggestions for a positive course of action now following further lack of response since it's a difficult call to hammer eBay support to state that some (not all?) pages may be photocopies, etc., when the seller refuses to discuss or check further to prove that either way?
No idea why they bothered adding that "70 pages" comment, though, since they should be well aware that doesn't match either or both items as I sent them the relevant links years ago...

Kingofpain89 wrote:Why even bother.

To try to ensure the auction is run openly and honestly for the benefit of both seller and buyer, perhaps?

mbassoc2003 wrote:So, maybe she's photocopying them and making a few bucks?

There was a very good reason for not mentioning explicitly which auction, previously, in the hope that this could be resolved without speculation or seeing the bidding being hyped prior to a resolution...

Allowing for the poor quality photos, the pages appear to be very white, crisp and sharp. Which is not impossible, of course. There /is/ a yellow sheet which may be a good sign, even if it's not quite the right color, which could be the photo. The .jpg compression makes it difficult to comment on printing appearing to show through the paper but on the plus side there is a hint of a grid on the floor map, too. etc.
Would be a cinch to comment more definitively if I had those in hand (as the various printings are available for comparison), but failing that decent scans and close questioning would probably suffice. Quite a few hours effort too many for Maggie it would seem, though.

mbassoc2003 wrote:Ah. Didn't realise this and the black foldered one were actually possibly related. My view on the black foldered one was that they were in all liklihood legit as the black folder was present.

Not related, afaik. I don't have every relevant auction as those are on the out-of-action drive, but I do have most of my email exchanges with Maggie for 2008/09.

mbassoc2003 wrote:It didn't actually occur that this could be the same seller selling photocopies of the originals that were sold with black folder. Hey ho. Maybe this is perfectly legit and hshe's got a drawer fill of them.

There have been genuine items. There have also been photocopies.
Would you expect someone who /has/ made high value sales of the former to still be adding "I know nothing about the stuff, I purchased it at an auction and some one said it should sell" several years later?
Not helpful when combined with zero response to questions...

mbassoc2003 wrote:My jibe was more to point out the reseller that bought the black folder lot didn't even bother to correct the details of the listing or the photo and relisted, knowing they were misleading people and that the photo blatantly lied about what was being sold.

I didn't think phrases like that were allowed around here.
Yeah, WW ain't always easy even with /reliable/ sellers.

bbarsh wrote:
The character sheets in between the books.

I dont see any character sheet.  I see a set of reference sheets and a blue piece of paper that the seller refers to as a "very rare, unused Adventure Record".  I assumed you might be referring to this:

http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/miscpag ... /75pc.html

But the color of the sheet in the auction isnt the same color (wrong size as well).  Is it a sheet from the 3rd print Character Archaic?  I have no idea what color they are but there is what looks to be a hole punch at the top and that is the only thing I can think of that is puched like that.

So I was just looking back through collectingwmaggie's feedback and the previous year before the Dwarven Glory, (June 1) sure enough is a Misty Isles Palace of the Vampire Queen at $4000! cary144 was the buyer



http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d ... =0&page=13



collectingwmaggie sure collects a lot of hard to find D&D and Judges Guild items!

Bunch of French modules and Gazetteers



http://cgi.ebay.com/Donjons-et-Dragons- ... 2eb0921b98

Seller has DL 1 - 15 (minus 11 and DL12...some bastard grabbed 12 already! )

for $9.95 each. Not too bad



eBay listings

misterspock wrote:In other developments, collectingwmaggie deleted all the bidding and pulled the auction for the PotVQ...


** expired/removed eBay auction **

Too bad there isn't a place to send items to get the authenticity and provenance verified; or is there?

SimperingToad wrote:Bunch of French modules and Gazetteers


** expired/removed eBay auction **

Yes, but it has a horrid feedback