[irv]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I'm not sure this is correct. Maybe I misread the article, but it seemed to me that the buyer was alleging that the photos Dan displayed of the card misrepresented the card's condition. The buyer never actually saw the card in person, and so was going by photos Dan had posted on eBay. I've seen complaints here all the time about eBay photos that are doctored to make a card's condition look better than it really is. I'm not saying that Dan did that. I don't know Dan, but everyone here seems to speak highly of him so I'm sure that isn't the case. I'm just saying that that seems to be what the dispute is about, whether the condition of the card is actually the same as it appeared in the photos.

That is what I thought as well when I read the article. I immediately thought of Battlefield and how she "manipulates" her cards to look better than what they actually are.