W.T.F. Lab #2

The 50% Mirage & the Label Swap — a high-value GPU order that “delivers” to someone else.

🧾 receipts-first 🏷️ label swap pattern 🧱 cancel-lock window 🌫️ frontline fog ⚖️ no verdicts

Cold Open

🎙️ W.T.F. Narrator

Welcome back to W.T.F. Lab, where we don’t deliver verdicts — we deliver receipts, replay, and the occasional meter that explains why your blood pressure spiked.

We record what happened, link it to evidence, label speculation as speculation, and let readers decide.

Case eBay — A100 40GB “Brand New” listing
Season “Mirage”
Mode Timeline + Receipt Vault

TL;DR

  • New seller account lists an A100 40GB at ~50% off with fast UPS shipping and easy returns.
  • Buyer asks for basic validation (usage, nvidia-smi, condition). Seller stays silent.
  • UPS tracking later shows a recipient + address mismatch (same city, different name/address).
  • Frontline support response: “wait for delivery”, with mismatch evidence not acknowledged in real time.
  • Seller cancels order shortly before delivery, creating a buyer-protection desync window; escalation follows (BBB + payment dispute).

Meters

🏷️ Label Swap Meter
City matches, recipient doesn’t
Recipient mismatchYes
Address mismatchYes
“Delivered” riskHigh
Buyer controlNone
Narrator: “Same city. Different universe.”
🧱 Cancel-Lock Meter
Cancel timing vs buyer protections
Cancel timingPre-delivery
INR continuityDesync risk
Internal pathFragmented
FallbackBank dispute
Narrator: “When ‘Cancel’ becomes a teleport spell.”
🌫️ Frontline Fog
City-level confirmation masquerading as verification
LIVE

Trigger condition: buyer flags a specific mismatch (recipient + address) before delivery, but support focuses on city/state only and advises waiting.

Narrator: “You asked: ‘wrong person.’ They answered: ‘correct city.’”
⏳ Follow-up Timer
Time until a meaningful platform response
Escalation filed2025-12-16
Platform reply2026-01-02
Elapsed17 days
Narrator: “The cleanest script is no script — just dead air.”

Seller Snapshot — Normal vs. Suspicious

Same product category. Same marketplace UI. Different risk profile. We’re not claiming intent here — just showing what the listing UI communicated at purchase time.

✅ Baseline listing (normal seller)
Feedback count shown next to the seller name (social proof exists)
eBay listing screenshot (normal seller). Seller shows feedback percentage and a feedback count in parentheses.
Listing UI example: seller shows feedback % + (count).
  • Signal: feedback count is visible (history exists).
  • Buyer interpretation: not a guarantee, but at least a measurable track record.
⚠️ The “too good to be true” listing
Seller looks “new / thin history” — price is ~50% off market
eBay listing screenshot (suspicious seller). Price is unusually low and the seller profile appears newly created or lacking visible history.
Red-flag combo: deep discount + thin seller history.
🎙️ Narrator

“Same UI, different gravity. One has a visible trail. The other is a brand-new parachute — sold at half price.”

  • Signal: price is dramatically below peer listings.
  • Signal: seller profile appears thin (low history visibility).
  • Risk: high-value item + low-trust counterparty is where tracking fraud tends to live.
Note: screenshots should be redacted (names/addresses/order IDs) before publishing.
🧬 Clone Listing Detector
Same copy. Same photos. Different seller.
Description MATCH Same wording pattern
Photos MATCH Same image set / angles
Title DIFF Scammer version ends with an extra “-”
Narrator: “If it looks like a clone and ships like a clone… the dash at the end is not a feature.”

Note: Matching text/images alone does not prove identity or intent. It’s a risk signal when paired with deep discount + thin seller history.

Timeline

2025-12-13
Purchase placed (A100 40GB ~50% off)
🧾 Receipt High value

Play-by-play

Buyer purchases an A100 40GB listing advertised as Brand New with fast UPS shipping and returns.

Replay Booth

Order receipt (redacted)
Order receipt (redacted).
Listing snapshot (redacted)
Listing snapshot (redacted).
2025-12-13
Buyer requests validation (no response)
💬 Message Silent

Play-by-play

Buyer asks for usage confirmation and a basic nvidia-smi screenshot. Seller does not reply.

Replay Booth

Buyer message screenshot (redacted)
Buyer message (redacted).
2025-12-14
Shipping label created
📦 Shipping In progress

Play-by-play

Tracking indicates a label is created.

Replay Booth

Label created screenshot (redacted)
Label created (redacted).
2025-12-15
Tracking reveals recipient mismatch
🏷️ Mismatch Red flag

Play-by-play

Buyer reviews UPS tracking details and sees the package addressed to a different name and address in the same city.

We do not claim intent. We document the mismatch and the resulting risk.

Replay Booth

UPS email notification (redacted)
UPS email notification (redacted).
UPS tracking details showing different recipient (redacted)
Tracking details: different recipient/address (redacted).
2025-12-15
Support contact: advised to wait
🌫️ Fog No escalation

Play-by-play

Buyer contacts platform support pre-delivery, reporting the recipient/address mismatch. Guidance given: wait for delivery, and report later if not received.

Evidence format used here: call summary / notes (audio not published).

Replay Booth

📝 Call summary (excerpt)
“Buyer reports tracking shows a different recipient/address. Support focuses on city-level info and advises waiting until delivery date.”
2025-12-17
Seller cancels order pre-delivery
🧱 Cancel-lock Flow break

Play-by-play

Seller sends a message claiming a wrong shipping label was placed and cancels the order “proactively.”

This cancellation creates a high-risk window for buyer protections if delivery status later shows “delivered” elsewhere.

Replay Booth

📨 Seller message (excerpt)
“My staff accidentally placed the wrong shipping label… To avoid any serious issues, I decided to cancel the order proactively…”
2025-12-16
BBB complaint filed (receipt package assembled)
🧾 Evidence Documented

Play-by-play

Buyer files a BBB complaint describing tracking mismatch, seller silence, and support response.

Replay Booth

BBB complaint submission screenshot (redacted)
BBB complaint submission (redacted).
2026-01-02
Platform response: “bank dispute takes priority”
📋 Policy Re-center

Play-by-play

Platform acknowledges the mismatch scenario and states that opening a payment dispute limited their ability to assist internally.

Replay Booth

📨 Response (short excerpt)
“The INR case closed because you opened a payment dispute… only one case can remain open for the same transaction…”

Evidence Vault

Key excerpts, sorted by date. Redactions applied for privacy. Keep long text here — not in the timeline.

🧾 Buyer validation message (2025-12-13) 
Hi there,


I’m interested in purchasing this A100 40GB GPU... (questions about usage, brand new status, nvidia-smi, signs of use)
Seller response: (none)
🏷️ UPS tracking mismatch (2025-12-15) — screenshot set 
Evidence:
- UPS email notification (redacted)
- UPS tracking details show a different recipient name + address (redacted)
Note: public version should hide full tracking number and full street address.
📨 Seller “wrong label” + proactive cancel (2025-12-17) — excerpt 
“There was an unexpected mistake on our side...
My staff accidentally placed the wrong shipping label...
I decided to cancel the order proactively...
full refund within 3–5 days...”
(Excerpt; redacted)
🧾 BBB complaint (2025-12-16) — summary + attachments list 
Complaint summary:
- High-value GPU purchase
- Tracking shows different recipient/address
- Seller silent
- Support advised “wait”
Attachments:
- Order receipt (redacted)
- Tracking mismatch (redacted)
- Message history (redacted)
📨 Platform response via BBB (2026-01-02) — excerpt 
Key points:
- Acknowledges mismatch scenario exists
- States bank dispute takes priority; internal assistance limited
- Notes seller account action (details not discussed)

No Verdict — Just a Framework

What we know
Facts supported by receipts
  • Buyer sent pre-shipping validation questions; seller did not reply.
  • Tracking details showed a different recipient name and address in the same city.
  • Buyer reported the mismatch pre-delivery; support advised waiting for delivery.
  • Seller canceled the order pre-delivery citing a label mistake.
  • Escalation followed via BBB and a payment dispute channel.
Open questions
Readers can judge
  • What safeguards should exist for high-value shipments when recipient data mismatches?
  • Should a seller cancellation be allowed to disrupt the buyer-protection flow?
  • What is the correct escalation path for pre-delivery mismatch reports?

Combat Report

A satire scoreboard for process behaviors. No conclusions. Only receipts, timelines, and patterns.

⚔️ Battle Stats — Platform Side
“Systems behave. People improvise.”
Pre-delivery Escalation
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Mismatch flagged early; response remained “wait for delivery.”
Evidence Acknowledgment
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
City-level confirmation overshadowed recipient/address mismatch evidence.
Protection Continuity
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Cancel + dispute created a desync window; internal paths became fragmented.
Policy Re-center
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
When conflict arises, resolution snaps back to “one case only” rules.
Risk Controls (High Value)
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Seller account action occurred, but only after the incident cycle started.

Rating scale: 5⭐ is the maximum for normal human workflows. If a case triggers W.T.F. Overclock Mode, the scale expands to 10⭐ (boss tier).

Narrator: “A fog build with a policy shield. Effective — just not for the buyer.”
🧩 Skill Book
Active + Passive abilities (for comedy only)

Seller — Active Skills

🎭 Silent Listing
Duration: Until asked again
Ignores validation questions, forcing the buyer to decide under uncertainty.
🏷️ Label Swap
Effect: “Delivered” illusion
Tracking can show a successful delivery while the intended recipient never receives the item.
🧱 Pre-Delivery Cancel
Trigger: Risk detected
Cancels the order before delivery, creating a buyer-protection continuity hazard.

Platform — Passive Skills

  • City-Level Confirmation: answers “same city” while the buyer asks “same recipient.”
  • Time Tax: buyer pays in hours even when money returns.
  • Policy Re-center: when escalation appears, cites “one case only” rule to collapse options.
  • Account Cleanup: post-incident enforcement is real, but doesn’t refund stress.
Narrator: “Not a villain arc — a failure mode that deserves sunlight.”

🎒 Drops & Outcome

  • Receipts logged: listing + messages + tracking mismatch + escalation trail preserved.
  • Primary lesson: for high-value items, recipient mismatch should trigger a real escalation path — pre-delivery.
  • Reader verdict: you decide. We only show the tape.
W.T.F. rule: we roast behaviors, not people.
W.T.F. rule: if “Delivered” doesn’t mean “to you,” we replay it like a bug report.
← Return to SD Home