Bio-Rupp

 

I'm lost, I don't understand how asking that labels be shown is going to take us down the road to hell...

What happened to "buy the book, not the label"?

I'm just glad that Bedrock gets it... buy the book, not the label. Especially if there's no label shown, advertised or supported.

This picture of you will live on regardless

For Pete's sake... just google it.

Ive read everything.

 

Who would make a rule saying joe cant accept, flip or do whatever he wants to a pgx book?

 

Green... go read the book called "1984".

Come back in the two years its going to take you to read it... then understand it... and we will discuss it then.

I swear you are living in my house!

 

Under the couch

I was wondering why all those leaves and paper were bunched up under there

I swear you are living in my house!

Green I know you just fly in to cause an uproar, but if you want to talk to the grown ups... please go back and read the last few pages.

The Dark Gnat Rises...

I still say the user guideline changes are up to the mods and enforced by mods.

If the community wants to punish a seller of 3rd party graded books it should get added to POV's PL/HOS rules.

 

ie- the community here, in support of the hosts, has voted that any member who is given a strike by the mods (for selling non CGC/ non raw books) will also be placed on the probation list for 2 months

Do it 3 times - HOS This puts it all back to "telling the party to take the book down" & "hitting the button" (today's situation).

 

The only non-strike option should be any buyer who receives a book that doesn't conform to rule #1 of user guidelines can nominate seller to temp PL - just a scan in the PL discussion thread with a link to sale. That option just makes selling a non-CGC too risky for sellers which should help discourage sales.

sample: 5) Probation List versus Hall Of Shame

a) The Probation List is for transactions that have not been fulfilled as promised. The community will also place members on probation who sell 3rd party graded books contrary to CGC's marketplace guidelines - non-sales nominations for this are supplemental to a mod issued strike.

 

 

What about when the buyer decides to keep the book, the buyer then removes it from the case... and then in a turn of events (due to second thoughts, anger, etc) decides to pursue this course of action?

 

Recent events have shown just a scenario. Is the buyer of said product to put on the list also? Is willfully accepting a other company's product here just as bad as selling it? Police arrest the drug buyers as well as the dealers don't they? Can we take their kids too?

 

Just saying... slippery slope.

 

The SELLER pushed the issue. Not only sold a PGX book but then wanted positive feedback after he expressly stated it was NOT a PGX slab. There was no anger, second thoughts, mob mentality. I realised at that time he just wasn't getting it. Fairly certain he gets it now.

 

As far as a slippery slope goes I have no problem being on the probation list, none. As long as you add me you need to go after every less than perfect transaction and have them slide down the same slope. This way when your turn comes we will all be there to greet you.

 

Joey this wasn't directed at you as a dis... just a simple notation stating where does it all end?

 

Honestly no one knows for sure if Trey's slab was in a PGX case or not... only you know this. And if said book isn't in a slab now (ie the way you supposedly received it) ... then that book is RAW and in truth you have no beef with Trey since all you have is a raw book to show what you received. Truthfully the only thing that I can see that the SELLER in your situation pushed... was asking for positive feedback from a "transacton" that was sucessfully enacted.

 

Plus it still hasn't been shown if Trey was put on the probation list for selling a PGX book or not. Only reason stated was "Moderation Violations"... not "rule violation". Moderation violations could mean a slew of things at the time of the issue... ranging from Trey's kamikaze posting PM's to his vibrant, erratic behavior. So all those that keep saying he has been put on that list because of this very issue, needs to go look at the reason stated.

 

Again this isn't about your issue, its about preventing further madness concerning this entire issue.

 

The NOTIFY MOD button is in place for this very reason if someone feels the need to use it.

 

Oh and trust me sir, the mob has been there to greet me... and we all saw how that worked out.

 

And Bozzcoe... its spelled "Kwanzaa".

 

I know for sure. After 6 years here and thousands of successful transaction my word should be enough. Some still need to stir the pot.

 

Then instead of removing the item from its case, you should have returned the item for a full refund which you were offered if memory serves.

 

Joey, again, not directed at you... but the situation.

 

It won't be long before perhaps those who purchase PGX books at lower prices just to press them and slab them in CGC cases... to sell them at higher prices... could be deemed unfit and dishonest.

 

Do you want this to happen as well?

 

No one questioning your word either. I've been here two years and had a few thousand successful transactions as well between here, the 'bay and a storefront business. My opinion (because everyone has one) is just as valid.

 

No one is questioning your integrity sir.

 

If you think this is not already happening (PGX To CGC) on a regular basis? I get tons of PGX slabs. No one questions their honesty. Maybe more questions need to be asked when purchasing books, both raw and stabbed.

 

 

I know its happening Joey. I'm just saying you probably don't want a future rule to surface stating you can't do that. Or declaring you to be dishonest for doing so.

I personally don't want that to happen either.

It won't be long before perhaps those who purchase PGX books at lower prices just to press them and slab them in CGC cases... to sell them at higher prices... could be deemed unfit and dishonest.

 

Do you want this to happen as well?

 

Too many threads in Comics General on this topic for it to go away. Though let's be honest. There are plenty of threads where it went the other way, and opening a PGX case made many feel like they should have left it alone.

 

 

 

You are correct Boscoe... but the fact remains that those old PGX slabs weren't busted open in the deliberate hopes of getting "lower" grades and lowering potiental revenue from said busting.

I still say the user guideline changes are up to the mods and enforced by mods.

If the community wants to punish a seller of 3rd party graded books it should get added to POV's PL/HOS rules.

 

ie- the community here, in support of the hosts, has voted that any member who is given a strike by the mods (for selling non CGC/ non raw books) will also be placed on the probation list for 2 months

Do it 3 times - HOS This puts it all back to "telling the party to take the book down" & "hitting the button" (today's situation).

 

The only non-strike option should be any buyer who receives a book that doesn't conform to rule #1 of user guidelines can nominate seller to temp PL - just a scan in the PL discussion thread with a link to sale. That option just makes selling a non-CGC too risky for sellers which should help discourage sales.

sample: 5) Probation List versus Hall Of Shame

a) The Probation List is for transactions that have not been fulfilled as promised. The community will also place members on probation who sell 3rd party graded books contrary to CGC's marketplace guidelines - non-sales nominations for this are supplemental to a mod issued strike.

 

 

What about when the buyer decides to keep the book, the buyer then removes it from the case... and then in a turn of events (due to second thoughts, anger, etc) decides to pursue this course of action?

 

Recent events have shown just a scenario. Is the buyer of said product to put on the list also? Is willfully accepting a other company's product here just as bad as selling it? Police arrest the drug buyers as well as the dealers don't they? Can we take their kids too?

 

Just saying... slippery slope.

 

The SELLER pushed the issue. Not only sold a PGX book but then wanted positive feedback after he expressly stated it was NOT a PGX slab. There was no anger, second thoughts, mob mentality. I realised at that time he just wasn't getting it. Fairly certain he gets it now.

 

As far as a slippery slope goes I have no problem being on the probation list, none. As long as you add me you need to go after every less than perfect transaction and have them slide down the same slope. This way when your turn comes we will all be there to greet you.

 

Joey this wasn't directed at you as a dis... just a simple notation stating where does it all end?

 

Honestly no one knows for sure if Trey's slab was in a PGX case or not... only you know this. And if said book isn't in a slab now (ie the way you supposedly received it) ... then that book is RAW and in truth you have no beef with Trey since all you have is a raw book to show what you received. Truthfully the only thing that I can see that the SELLER in your situation pushed... was asking for positive feedback from a "transacton" that was sucessfully enacted.

 

Plus it still hasn't been shown if Trey was put on the probation list for selling a PGX book or not. Only reason stated was "Moderation Violations"... not "rule violation". Moderation violations could mean a slew of things at the time of the issue... ranging from Trey's kamikaze posting PM's to his vibrant, erratic behavior. So all those that keep saying he has been put on that list because of this very issue, needs to go look at the reason stated.

 

Again this isn't about your issue, its about preventing further madness concerning this entire issue.

 

The NOTIFY MOD button is in place for this very reason if someone feels the need to use it.

 

Oh and trust me sir, the mob has been there to greet me... and we all saw how that worked out.

 

And Bozzcoe... its spelled "Kwanzaa".

 

I know for sure. After 6 years here and thousands of successful transaction my word should be enough. Some still need to stir the pot.

Then instead of removing the item from its case, you should have returned the item for a full refund which you were offered if memory serves.

Joey, again, not directed at you... but the situation.

It won't be long before perhaps those who purchase PGX books at lower prices just to press them and slab them in CGC cases... to sell them at higher prices... could be deemed unfit and dishonest.

Do you want this to happen as well?

No one questioning your word either. I've been here two years and had a few thousand successful transactions as well between here, the 'bay and a storefront business. My opinion (because everyone has one) is just as valid.

No one is questioning your integrity sir.

Whatever are you talking about, Sheeet Meister?

 

 

You got me there

 

 

Ya got me, Clooneython Lord and Master.

 

Whatever are you talking about, Sheeet Meister?

 

You got me there

I still say the user guideline changes are up to the mods and enforced by mods.

If the community wants to punish a seller of 3rd party graded books it should get added to POV's PL/HOS rules.

 

ie- the community here, in support of the hosts, has voted that any member who is given a strike by the mods (for selling non CGC/ non raw books) will also be placed on the probation list for 2 months

Do it 3 times - HOS This puts it all back to "telling the party to take the book down" & "hitting the button" (today's situation).

 

The only non-strike option should be any buyer who receives a book that doesn't conform to rule #1 of user guidelines can nominate seller to temp PL - just a scan in the PL discussion thread with a link to sale. That option just makes selling a non-CGC too risky for sellers which should help discourage sales.

sample: 5) Probation List versus Hall Of Shame

a) The Probation List is for transactions that have not been fulfilled as promised. The community will also place members on probation who sell 3rd party graded books contrary to CGC's marketplace guidelines - non-sales nominations for this are supplemental to a mod issued strike.

 

 

What about when the buyer decides to keep the book, the buyer then removes it from the case... and then in a turn of events (due to second thoughts, anger, etc) decides to pursue this course of action?

 

Recent events have shown just a scenario. Is the buyer of said product to put on the list also? Is willfully accepting a other company's product here just as bad as selling it? Police arrest the drug buyers as well as the dealers don't they? Can we take their kids too?

 

Just saying... slippery slope.

 

The SELLER pushed the issue. Not only sold a PGX book but then wanted positive feedback after he expressly stated it was NOT a PGX slab. There was no anger, second thoughts, mob mentality. I realised at that time he just wasn't getting it. Fairly certain he gets it now.

 

As far as a slippery slope goes I have no problem being on the probation list, none. As long as you add me you need to go after every less than perfect transaction and have them slide down the same slope. This way when your turn comes we will all be there to greet you.

Joey this wasn't directed at you as a dis... just a simple notation stating where does it all end?

Honestly no one knows for sure if Trey's slab was in a PGX case or not... only you know this. And if said book isn't in a slab now (ie the way you supposedly received it) ... then that book is RAW and in truth you have no beef with Trey since all you have is a raw book to show what you received. Truthfully the only thing that I can see that the SELLER in your situation pushed... was asking for positive feedback from a "transacton" that was sucessfully enacted.

Plus it still hasn't been shown if Trey was put on the probation list for selling a PGX book or not. Only reason stated was "Moderation Violations"... not "rule violation". Moderation violations could mean a slew of things at the time of the issue... ranging from Trey's kamikaze posting PM's to his vibrant, erratic behavior. So all those that keep saying he has been put on that list because of this very issue, needs to go look at the reason stated.

Again this isn't about your issue, its about preventing further madness concerning this entire issue.

The NOTIFY MOD button is in place for this very reason if someone feels the need to use it.

Oh and trust me sir, the mob has been there to greet me... and we all saw how that worked out.

And Bozzcoe... its spelled "Kwanzaa".

I still say the user guideline changes are up to the mods and enforced by mods.

If the community wants to punish a seller of 3rd party graded books it should get added to POV's PL/HOS rules.

 

ie- the community here, in support of the hosts, has voted that any member who is given a strike by the mods (for selling non CGC/ non raw books) will also be placed on the probation list for 2 months

Do it 3 times - HOS This puts it all back to "telling the party to take the book down" & "hitting the button" (today's situation).

 

The only non-strike option should be any buyer who receives a book that doesn't conform to rule #1 of user guidelines can nominate seller to temp PL - just a scan in the PL discussion thread with a link to sale. That option just makes selling a non-CGC too risky for sellers which should help discourage sales.

sample: 5) Probation List versus Hall Of Shame

a) The Probation List is for transactions that have not been fulfilled as promised. The community will also place members on probation who sell 3rd party graded books contrary to CGC's marketplace guidelines - non-sales nominations for this are supplemental to a mod issued strike.

 

What about when the buyer decides to keep the book, the buyer then removes it from the case... and then in a turn of events (due to second thoughts, anger, etc) decides to pursue this course of action?

Recent events have shown just a scenario. Is the buyer of said product to put on the list also? Is willfully accepting a other company's product here just as bad as selling it? Police arrest the drug buyers as well as the dealers don't they? Can we take their kids too?

Just saying... slippery slope.

Paul just hooked me up with the Zatanna set and I'm sure when it gets here it will just like the rest of the items he's sold me over the years...

- Well Packed

- Accurately graded

- Each book individually kissed on the back cover to prove the love we share

Many thanks Paul !

Just a note that I just finished putting up about 20 pages of $1 books in the Clooneython thread over in mixed. Lots of good stuff from the last 3 to 4 years. Check it out please

Just posted a recap of the first 50 pages of hardbacks here...

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=5326937#Post5326937

Please stop by and browse a little if you have nothing else to do but wait to leave for the in-laws house Remember shipping in the USA stays the same no matter how much you buy.

I'm not a lawyer at all. Plus, I don't shop Brian's sales threads. Thirdly, more power to him. It's a shame one rotten apple can spoil the entire barrel so that label scans are a requirement.

So you just make sheet up to argue? Do the facts matter?

Sign post. Wrong road home. Have at it.

GIFSoup

Ouch

Interesting aside:

 

The conflagration that's been kindled on this Christmas Eve Eve was sparked in the RMA vacuum that is today's CGC forum.

I fail to see the relevance of RMA to anything?

 

We're surely allowed to discuss selling guideline violations in his absence?

 

I still think RMA would argue with a closed door as to why it should be open

Ewwwwww. A good thread topic.

You have my total support sir... start that sucker up

 

Hold on a sec. Practicing with finger puppets.

 

The one finger is yelling... " that door should be open" !

Interesting aside:

 

The conflagration that's been kindled on this Christmas Eve Eve was sparked in the RMA vacuum that is today's CGC forum.

I fail to see the relevance of RMA to anything?

 

We're surely allowed to discuss selling guideline violations in his absence?

 

I still think RMA would argue with a closed door as to why it should be open

 

Ewwwwww. A good thread topic.

You have my total support sir... start that sucker up

Interesting aside:

 

The conflagration that's been kindled on this Christmas Eve Eve was sparked in the RMA vacuum that is today's CGC forum.

I fail to see the relevance of RMA to anything?

 

We're surely allowed to discuss selling guideline violations in his absence?

I still think RMA would argue with a closed door as to why it should be open

It was hard to follow your last post without the "bold" type MF... but I got the most of it.

And yes it is worse to me to "call someone on dishonest behavior" when you are only stating your version of dishonest.

Call him on breaking a "board rule"... if he did in fact break one.

His actions... no matter what they were... should be handled by the Mods... you or I... or anyone really... have no bearing and no say in the matter in terms of punishment / or the brandishing the aspect of punishment.

And I knew you would take that second candy bar too

 

Phil already knew the rules and decided to list PGX books anyway. I voted yes for the change to the rules, but in the alternative why just not put Phil on the probation list or ban him from selling in the forum for a set period of time.

 

Whoa now. Phil is nice fellow and sells quality material. To immediatly push the probation threat on Phil is premature at best.

 

As just witnessed about a month ago between POV and divad and the "Trey on the probation list - off the probation" list fiasco... whats going on here is to be handled by the Mods and was obviously settled upon with the Trey situation.

 

As I've stated before, if the Mods find a problem with any listing or seller and they deem it necessary for action, then let them do their job.

 

That said, have whatever ammendments made to whatever rules you find necessary to make each and every one of you sleep better at night.

 

Just please don't try to fry a seller UNTIL ANY NEW RULE IS AMMENDED AND PUT IN PLACE by the powers that be. Until then, just push the little "notify mods" button and let them do what they deem fit.

 

Phil really doesn't need the hassle right here at Christmas... does he?

 

 

1) I don't give a mess if Phil is a nice person, it's irrelevant.

 

2) I don't give a mess if Phil sells nice material, it's irrelevant.

 

3) Phil is dishonest. He knowingly sold a PGX book on the CGC board in clear violation of the rules and took steps to cover it up.

 

4) Phil did not break a rule yet to be enacted. He broke a long standing rule (rule number 1 IIRC). He also took specific steps to cover up what he was doing (knowledge and intent). The way I look at it he screwed over the entire board. If CGC decides to stop letting us buy and sell books here how would you feel then? Next time you want to start a Cloonython thread keep in mind you are only able to do so because CGC ALLOWS you to do so.

 

5) The mods have their way of dealing with issues, (vacations/bannings) and the boardies have developed our own for issues relating to the selling threads (the probation list). The mods can do whatever they decide to do on their end as Phil violated their rules, but he also screwed over the rest of us with his little stunt, I think we should at least be able to discuss a remedy of our own.

 

6) This is not the first time something like this has come up with Phil apparently. How many times do you ask someone to abide by the rules of the community and have them flip you the bird before you take action?

 

 

MF (Mutie Fan),

 

MF, I fully understand what you are trying to convey. But does this make a person "dishonest" by breaking a rule imposed here.

 

In my opinion, yes, it does make him dishonest. Phil knew the rules. Phil devised a subterfuge in order to try and get around the rules. In my book this is dishonest.

 

Yes MF, I fully understand that CGC is our host here and I appreciate the shout out to my Clooneython thread (cheap sealed hardbacks still to be had in CT11 right now btw).

 

Sure you can discuss a remedy on your own. I'm 100% for it. But trashing Phil's name in public with words like "dishonest" isn't the way to go about it. Sometimes that can come back on YOU (as some know too well).

 

Well said and agreed. It can come back on me. However, if we are all to afraid to have a discussion on an issue like this as it may come back on us where will we be?

 

Also it breaks this rule here... better watch it MF, you might get banned or put on the probation list according to this rule below....

 

------------------------------

 

Much like "Threads started explicity to bash other members", signatures used to bash other members are not allowed either.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=235115#Post235115

 

-------------------------------

 

Thanks for pointing that out. I will say that I did not start this thread (it is a probation discussion thread). If by pointing out Phil intentionally violated board rules I am trashing him, then all I can say is he did not break the rules in the first place there would be no trashing.

 

I'm all for putting up a vote to see the general consensus like Sharon did. That is totally fine... but when another overly vocal, grandstanding torch bearer (who as I like to bring up has spent some time on the strike list himself ) calls people who don't vote to his liking "nitwits"... then your "vote" loses some of it meaning and becomes a little more null.

 

You want members to respect the rules, then get whoever you've got helping you with your argument to not disrespect others for their opinions. Especially when those very opinions are being asked for in a polling process.

 

Obviously you are referencing Watson. Watson and I have had only the most minimal of contact on this board. He has not asked me to post anything and neither have I asked him to help me with any argument.

 

Again, its still a Mod issue to take care of. Its up to them and not the torch-bearers to decide.

 

All you have to do is hit that "notify mod" button MF... and your job is done. Calling the man dishonest to me implys he ripped someone off or kidnapped a baby.

 

Ripping someone off or kidnapping a baby are not the only qualifiers for someone to be dishonest. Again, IMHO Phil knew the rules, said screw the rules I am going to do what I want, and I am going to take steps to cover up my actions so I don't get caught. I am comfortable calling that dishonest.

 

This is about as "dishonest" as taken two candy bars that fell out of the machine when you pay for one.

MF... would you leave that second candy bar in the machine or take it? Ever went over the speed limit? Maybe ran a stop sign when someone is not looking? Took more than two pennies out of the penny fund? If you did... did that make you dishonest?

A wise man once said "all this back and forth when really only a reminder to the party in question would have been enough" should be all thats needed in this case.

Phil has done nothing to be discussed concerning probation. Again this issue was covered in the Trey back and forth a month ago.

Rather than using the term "dishonest" ...why not just say you assume "he broke a board rule". Calling this man dishonest could hurt his reputation and his livelyhood. Is that what you want to do to this man?

To each his own...but I don't think that the torchbearing is worth doing that in this case.

Love that book too sir

 

Phil already knew the rules and decided to list PGX books anyway. I voted yes for the change to the rules, but in the alternative why just not put Phil on the probation list or ban him from selling in the forum for a set period of time.

 

Whoa now. Phil is nice fellow and sells quality material. To immediatly push the probation threat on Phil is premature at best.

 

As just witnessed about a month ago between POV and divad and the "Trey on the probation list - off the probation" list fiasco... whats going on here is to be handled by the Mods and was obviously settled upon with the Trey situation.

 

As I've stated before, if the Mods find a problem with any listing or seller and they deem it necessary for action, then let them do their job.

 

That said, have whatever ammendments made to whatever rules you find necessary to make each and every one of you sleep better at night.

 

Just please don't try to fry a seller UNTIL ANY NEW RULE IS AMMENDED AND PUT IN PLACE by the powers that be. Until then, just push the little "notify mods" button and let them do what they deem fit.

 

Phil really doesn't need the hassle right here at Christmas... does he?

 

 

1) I don't give a mess if Phil is a nice person, it's irrelevant.

 

2) I don't give a mess if Phil sells nice material, it's irrelevant.

 

3) Phil is dishonest. He knowingly sold a PGX book on the CGC board in clear violation of the rules and took steps to cover it up.

 

4) Phil did not break a rule yet to be enacted. He broke a long standing rule (rule number 1 IIRC). He also took specific steps to cover up what he was doing (knowledge and intent). The way I look at it he screwed over the entire board. If CGC decides to stop letting us buy and sell books here how would you feel then? Next time you want to start a Cloonython thread keep in mind you are only able to do so because CGC ALLOWS you to do so.

 

5) The mods have their way of dealing with issues, (vacations/bannings) and the boardies have developed our own for issues relating to the selling threads (the probation list). The mods can do whatever they decide to do on their end as Phil violated their rules, but he also screwed over the rest of us with his little stunt, I think we should at least be able to discuss a remedy of our own.

 

6) This is not the first time something like this has come up with Phil apparently. How many times do you ask someone to abide by the rules of the community and have them flip you the bird before you take action?

MF (Mutie Fan),

MF, I fully understand what you are trying to convey. But does this make a person "dishonest" by breaking a rule imposed here.

Yes MF, I fully understand that CGC is our host here and I appreciate the shout out to my Clooneython thread (cheap sealed hardbacks still to be had in CT11 right now btw).

Sure you can discuss a remedy on your own. I'm 100% for it. But trashing Phil's name in public with words like "dishonest" isn't the way to go about it. Sometimes that can come back on YOU (as some know too well).

Also it breaks this rule here... better watch it MF, you might get banned or put on the probation list according to this rule below....

------------------------------

Much like "Threads started explicity to bash other members", signatures used to bash other members are not allowed either.

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=235115#Post235115

-------------------------------

I'm all for putting up a vote to see the general consensus like Sharon did. That is totally fine... but when another overly vocal, grandstanding torch bearer (who as I like to bring up has spent some time on the strike list himself ) calls people who don't vote to his liking "nitwits"... then your "vote" loses some of it meaning and becomes a little more null.

You want members to respect the rules, then get whoever you've got helping you with your argument to not disrespect others for their opinions. Especially when those very opinions are being asked for in a polling process.

Again, its still a Mod issue to take care of. Its up to them and not the torch-bearers to decide.

All you have to do is hit that "notify mod" button MF... and your job is done. Calling the man dishonest to me implys he ripped someone off or kidnapped a baby.

This is about as "dishonest" as taken two candy bars that fell out of the machine when you pay for one.