Proper action for a stolen package from a Buy/Sell/Trade transaction

[drcy]

I had an important overnight UPSP delivery that took 13 days.

It is a legitimate issue that a seller and pro-sellers have that the seller does everything right shipping-wise, but the shipping is entirely in someone else's hands. This is why it isn't a clear cut matter of team-buyer versus team-seller. My view is it's the buyer's responsibility to have the package delivered (unless otherwise stipulated in the sales description). However, this USPS issue is why those in the minority here arguing that it's not automatically all on the seller have legitimate points. One may disagree with their perspective, but they aren't objectively wrong.

It's difficult to say something is black-and-white either a or c, when there's a b in the equation as well. One may disagree, but a legitimate argument can be that the seller is not responsible for "act of God."

In ethical (and moral) questions, there are no objective answers. It usually involves community shared subjective feelings.

It's also true that, as most people on Net54 are collectors/buyers, there tends to be a rote pro-buyer bias, and buyers often want things to all be in their forever. I remember a Net54 insisting an old auction house LOA guarantee should be forever and for the appreciated (not original sell) value, even though the document clearly said three years and he wasn't the original buyer. I said that life would be easy and we'd all be rich if we could rewrite contracts any way we wanted twenty years later and when we weren't even a party in the contract.

Likely some will say "Well, the buyer should self-insure" yet complain to high heaven when a seller adds a 25 cent self-insurance charge on a sale or even charges actual shipping and handling cost. Many or even most sellers lose money on shipping charge, so it's a curious argument that they should somehow derive self-insurance money out of that loss.

Maybe a new hobby norm is buyers should expect a small additional fee to all sales, as USPS insurance is no good and buyers expect sellers to take all the risk/responsibility. If buyers don't agree to that then maybe it shouldn't after all be on the seller when USPS fucks up.