End of your straw man argument Mr Hines.

What Straw Man argument? You don't get to take whatever you disagree with and call it by some random logical fallacy's name.

But Hupp says he didn't.

Right. This claim needs to be verified, and since it can't be, then it must be listed as pre-owned.

Can you imagine how you would feel if you bought a brand new copy of a game physically for PC (indulge me digital elitists), kept it wrapped, and then tried to sell it, only to be told you have to list it as 'used', knowing full well that 'used' on PC would put a customer off because of codes being 'used'. It would also not accurately describe the condition of the item.

And can you imagine how you would feel if you bought a copy of a game listed as "New", which later turned out to have had its contents removed/keys redeemed? "New", in that case, would also not accurately describe the condition of the product, and since its newness cannot be verified, it must be listed as pre-owned.

And guess what? It actually is pre-owned. If you buy something, that means you own it. That makes the thing you are selling pre-owned.

You're dead wrong, and it's ridiculous to be upset about this. But hey, keep tilting at that windmill if it makes you feel better.

PS...this is the part where you do the reddit thing and either downvote without responding, or skim my comment, and respond to something you think I said rather than what I actually said.

Seriously, give me a good reason why this random guy on the internet should be taken at his word. Give me a good argument as for why a pre-owned product shouldn't be listed as pre-owned rather than new.