mumbai

Nevermind. User error (kinda). Insta-crash with the SDL 2.0.4 framework, which I had installed on my system at the time of the error report. An upgrade of the SDL framework to 2.0.5 resolved the issue. I do note that SDL 2.0.4 is bundled within the CoolCV .app, but given that macOS still requires separate installation of the SDL framework outside the .app bundle to work (see much earlier report back a few pages in this thread), that doesn't pose an issue, though the packaged version of SDL within CoolCV should (maybe?) be updated to 2.0.5 if it doesn't pose new challenges. Sorry for the report, which proved trivial to correct, at least in my case.

Doing so would humorously negate in part the rationale behind the existing branding of the site as GameGavel.

Sorry, I was editing my original post to clarify what led to the flameout. Here are the added details, again: "ETA: To clarify, dropping .rom files onto the window crashes out the application instantly. Dropping onto the .app icon in the dock loads the .rom without issue. For whatever reason, I figured dropping onto the window would also work ... guess not. Should it? If not, can the window not serve as a drop target to prevent frustration?"

Yay! Unfortunately, drag-and-drop of .rom files for v0.6.5 on macOS 10.12.5 (Sierra) == insta-crash. Want the error report log? ETA: To clarify, dropping .rom files onto the window crashes out the application instantly. Dropping onto the .app icon in the dock loads the .rom without issue. For whatever reason, I figured dropping onto the window would also work ... guess not. Should it? If not, can the window not serve as a drop target to prevent frustration?

Fair enough.

In my personal opinion (and only that), the remainder of your post seems to be a disproportionate response to someone you don't know leaving negative feedback for a single transaction with which you weren't involved.

As I said, "people can bicker over the relative scale of this commercialization."

Sure, but this motivation (itself potentially driven by many things) does not match in full the earlier claim, which denied any financial component. I recognize that saying something is "all about the passion" feels good and reads well, but it's a bit of a gloss.

It's fairly obvious that when prices are affixed to homebrews and thereby treated as products, it becomes a commercial enterprise. People can bicker over the relative scale of this commercialization (and have in this and related threads), but it is what it is. Etc.

Clearly not entirely so.

Ah, but everyone knows that the authentic hybrid controller has one grey fire button and one beige. This has two beige buttons. Clearly fraudulent.

...and there was another boxed Wizmath that more recently traded hands on eBay as part of a CV collection that altogether didn't come close to that valuation.

Mid-March 2017 a sealed CIB of this sold on eBay. I'm relatively certain at least one other standalone CIB sale was transacted on eBay in the past year, not counting any of those mentioned in this sub-thread.

Bump. The following additions (+) and deletions (-) to availability have been made to the cartridge and accessory lists since I last significantly revised the lead post: ColecoVision Cartridges: + 2010: The Graphic Action Game + Antarctic Adventure + B.C. II: Grog's Revenge + Beamrider + Burgertime + Centipede + Defender + The Dukes of Hazzard + Facemaker + Frenzy + Frogger - Front Line + Gateway to Apshai + Gorf + Keystone Kapers + Miner 2049er - Mr. Do! + Omega Race + Pitfall! + Popeye + Q*Bert + River Raid + Root Beer Tapper - Sammy Lightfoot + Smurf: Rescue in Gargamel's Castle + Telly Turtle - Tournament Tennis (Imagic) ColecoVision Accessories: - Super Action Controller I expect there will be further alterations in the near future, when I find the time to synchronize the lists here with what I have on hand. Thanks for your continued interest.

That's the cartridge adaptor Coleco supplied through the mail to enable a wider variety of (third-party) Atari 2600 cartridges to slot into the expansion module. Not a common find.

Long overdue bump. Revisions underway to availability lists (additions and deletions). Thanks.

See PM sent.

I should be marked as "PAID" (sent 15 January). Thanks.

I should be marked as "PAID" (sent 15 January). Thanks.

Ditto on the above.

This is something of a false dichotomy. Given your experience and feelings regarding Best Offers, you should probably ditch them altogether or set an automatic rejection threshold as xucaen has already mentioned above. If you can accurately estimate your shipping costs at time of listing, you should consider free shipping as your default option. It eliminates "Shipping and handling charges" as one of the four detailed seller metrics buyers can ding you on and significantly reduces the likelihood of argument over what was spent on shipping, as there's no room for one to argue you, as a seller, overcharged for that line item. Just be very clear and accurate about what "Free" shipping means in terms of delivery time to avoid potential hurt feelings. eBay also boosts placement in search rankings for items with free shipping, unless things have changed recently. You're already paying a percentage to eBay on the amount you would have collected for separate shipping costs (again, unless eBay has reversed itself on that). So, I don't think there's a huge downside to flipping over to free shipping if you know your costs ... unless you're selling extremely low-value items where baked-in baseline shipping would grossly exaggerate the presentation of total cost to buyers who refuse to do the math on competing offers or look to purchase multiple such items at once from a single seller to collect a combined shipping discount (from those who spell out a such). Just my opinion, though.

In a word: poor.

FWIW, Joe has had these ever since he assumed control of Jerry G.'s inventory ever so long ago, though never bothered to advertise their availability well. His transition to eBay has simply enabled him to dump the part-but-not-whole miscellany he's long had in stock before a broader audience with minimal effort.

Doubtful, as eBay would have to staff-up authenticators for such items, which eBay likely views now and for the foreseeable future as a poor fit for the program as few such transactions would be considered "higher-end" relative to other product categories. I imagine it depends on how the numbers shake out for eBay's projections for the program's uptake outside the realm of fashion. Given that the program is opt-in, for an additional unspecified fee, and adds a step to the sales process to permit authentication prior to transaction close, there might be limited appeal to video game sellers unless it became the norm for many to most to utilize the program, if offered. That would leave it to buyers to opt-in to the program and shoulder the associated costs of any proposed video game verification process by eBay ... but as a percentage of all such transactions, how many are of sufficient value and questionable authenticity that require an expert opinion (i.e., aren't screamingly obvious fakes to even a layperson) to justify that extra expense? Given that the 2x refund penalty only applies to items that pass through eBay's authentication step that are later found to be inauthentic (with the likely requirement for proper third-party assessment to a degree satisfactory to eBay), unless eBay's authenticators prove to be utterly incompetent, I don't see the loophole suggested above that sellers could repeatedly exploit.

I'm interested, too.