Which is why reliance on any single metric is short-sighted, and being cognisant of additional factors such as language use has value.
It's not of value unless you suggest that someone who is non-native English speaker is more likely to be a criminal. Are you suggesting that? If YES, please prove it. If not, you know why you're wrong.
I am doing no such thing. Just as most people who blow themselves up in misguided acts of terrorism would be Muslim, so most incidents of attempted fraud against English speakers on the internet would show a poor command of the language. Drawing from this recognition the inference that I believe all Muslims to be potential time-bombs or all non-native English speakers to be fraudsters is disingenuous and dimwitted. Similarly, pontificating that neither characteristic warrants additional care is nothing but a ridiculous appeal to political correctness.
False. There is no indication that crooks on EBay are more likely to be non-English speakers. And from my own experience, I've been defrauded more by native English speakers than non-native ones. The only non-native one was in fact SPANISH, and she did not hide that fact. Product was also manufactured in Spain.
There are very few non-Muslim suicide bombers currently (if any), but there are many criminals who possess good English skills. US, CA, AUS, NZ and other prisons are full of native English speakers. So you can't use English skills as a metric of reliability of a listing. In fact I once used it and because the guy appeared to be a rock solid Anglo-Saxon dude I gave him the benefit of the doubt and so lost several hundred dollars in the process while I waited for him to ship an item, he waited long enough for the PayPal buyer protection to expire.
Observed truth can't be a fallacy.
Your opinion of me does not detract from my point. That's the fallacy. That I may appear pompous, arrogant, etc to you is entirely irrelevant. I may in fact be pompous, arrogant and pig headed. But that's irrelevant to my point. My aim is also to point out a perceived injustice. And millions of native English speakers would agree with me here, at least the ones who are on the receiving end of pre-judgements based on their linguistic abilities. But my aim is irrelevant, even if I do this for LOLs, it's still does not detract from my point.
No, having Netflix cancel my membership and subsequently having to approach eBay in order to reverse the transaction, and seeing a number of others mirroring my experience is a valid reason to judge a listing as potentially fraudulent.
That's OK. But saying that his imperfect English should have been a warning sign is wrong.
Why the **** would I want to go on some ramble attempting to prove a claim I'm not making? :wtf:
Then reject the language claim and say it's not a valid indicator of fraud.
Didn't.
I am defending myself against a false accusation; I will do so until you either cease your bull****, or acknowledge your error.
OK, do you think invalid use of English grammar on an international site is a valid reason to consider the listing to be fraudulent?
If yes, on what grounds?
So you have no excuse for stereotyping me. Thought not. Will you now kindly cease doing so?
To stereotype you I'd have to accuse you of something based on some characteristic you share with some group I though were more likely to be doing something wrong. I'm just judging what you posted here. I'm not saying you're wrong because you post on MyBB, or you have a handle you have or you buy Netflix vouchers when you know they're only for US residents and you're unlikely to be a US resident posting on MyBB at this time. I also disobey regional copyright restrictions by buying US Itunes vouchers. I'm not stereotyping you at all for those or any other reasons.
Anyhow I don't want to derail this thread anymore. If you want we can continue in a different thread at some stage. Thanks.
