For the record, I do not believe he overtly 'hid' the fan mod statement with any awareness it would be less conspicuous or likely to be noticed. Rather, I think it occurred quite unintentionally through a combination of his ignorance and a stunning degree of apathy or lack of concern that his advertising style may not be an effective way to communicate such disclosures.
However, some people are chronically or serially involved in such 'unintentional' incidents because you can't learn from anything when you are never wrong. In their mind, there is only black and white. If someone else doesn't see his black and white, well they're obviously just stupid or dishonest. There is no 'grey', 'nuance', or 'middle ground' in the world. As long as the disclosure was put somewhere in the auction listing, it meets the most literal and narrow meaning and that's all they are obligated to do. There is no other interpretation.
Its like someone who comes to work and does the absolute minimum required to avoid getting fired based on their interpretation of the job description, and scoffs at the very suggestion there may be other ways to interpret the job description that see something more. Its enough for these people that they always "meet" some bare minimum construed in the most narrow sense that also happens to always be self-serving (purely by "coincidence", of course). Indeed, they often build themselves up based on the fact they "always" meet their obligations and lament how others do not meet this standard. Nevermind that they have interpreted those obligations in a way that sets the bar for themselves about as low as anyone could possibly get away with, while holding others to a much higher standard. e.g. the buyer is responsible to know if the card exists in 256-bit, but I'm not responsible to know that my disclosure may not be noticed. The buyer must accept responsibility not only for his mistakes but mine, too.
And all that cuts straight to ethics (and personality traits).