I'm not looking into the feedback here, just the auction, as they are 2 separate issues. You should honor your auction for a couple reasons. It's received valid bids and interest. It doesn't look good if you plan on trying to continue to hold auctions if you cancel it because of your feedback. The people bidding on your item know enough to do their research and due diligence, so leave it up to them to decide if they continue in the auction, so far you're the person to bring this up.
I would also say if you are worried you won't receive the amount you want for this item because of the feedback issue, you should set minimum bid amounts at the beginning of the next one.
Edit: You should also stop multi-posting and making accusations. The people bidding on your item wouldn't resort to trying to suppress the price by leaving you negative feedback.
At least one valid reply.
Thank you.
I was never thinking to cancel my auction, i wanted to freez it with the highest bid and time left and continue after feedbacks are solved.
I will honor that auction, of course.
I am just tired of this feedback farming and ill mindset by kids. They think that if they are going red tag some people every day they will become trusted. And i can say this is working out for them. There are plenty trusted people on the forum who have never done any money operation or have never did any exchange.
As an actual on-again off-again artist, I think I should chip in and say that no artist would ever present another's work to advertise his own as StackItUp has done. Copyright issues aside, such a method of advertising makes no sense. Unless the artist is extremely good at imitating the other's unique style (which I seriously doubt is the case here), such a deception will be detected immediately when the buyer sees that the art he purchased is not what was advertised. Nor is there any need for such deception, as every artist hoping to sell commissions will have an extensive portfolio of their own work. I don't believe StackItUp's excuse that he is prevented from publishing any of his previous works. Certainly there are cases where the artist gives up publication rights to some of his works, but not all of them. He'd have something to show to prospective clients or he'd never be able to get those jobs in the first place.
An artist's portfolio is his résumé, his CV. Would you hire, or even believe, a prospective employee who had no résumé whatsoever and claims he cannot tell you about any of his previous work because of "privacy"? Or worse, one who outright lies on his résumé and, when caught, claims he cannot reveal his true work history and that the lies are just "examples"? I think not.
Look. Can anyone sober show up? Please
Open your eyes you fucking prick. It was not for sale! I wasnt selling anything. It was not an auction. It was not an item sale.
It was SERVICE for a FUTURE product. WITHOUT ASKING ANY PAYMENT.
"Would you hire?" - for free? Yes. I would.
And many people would do the same.
As an actual on-again off-again artist, I think I should chip in and say that no artist would ever present another's work to advertise his own as StackItUp has done. Copyright issues aside, such a method of advertising makes no sense. Unless the artist is extremely good at imitating the other's unique style (which I seriously doubt is the case here), such a deception will be detected immediately when the buyer sees that the art he purchased is not what was advertised. Nor is there any need for such deception, as every artist hoping to sell commissions will have an extensive portfolio of their own work. I don't believe StackItUp's excuse that he is prevented from publishing any of his previous works. Certainly there are cases where the artist gives up publication rights to some of his works, but not all of them. He'd have something to show to prospective clients or he'd never be able to get those jobs in the first place.
An artist's portfolio is his résumé, his CV. Would you hire, or even believe, a prospective employee who had no résumé whatsoever and claims he cannot tell you about any of his previous work because of "privacy"? Or worse, one who outright lies on his résumé and, when caught, claims he cannot reveal his true work history and that the lies are just "examples"? I think not.
Again legendary member with only red feedback. And based on your profile you are leaving red trust for members on a daily basics. Whats this, red tagged detectives club?