-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
EC ed
-
Posts
7,145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by EC ed
-
-
I'd politely ask in his thread to post pictures. There's nothing wrong with asking.
Yep, and now that crassus mentions it, someone might as well post Arch's rules template citing rule #11. Or, is that one too trivial? (Sorry, but I'm still trying to figure out which rules are too trivial to enforce, and which ones are worth enforcing
) -
Here are my 3 Foxes, all SOTI books....
-
That is creepy...especially since it's clear that she's had her throat slit
-
-
Just bought a lower grade raw TFTC 42 from Barton - book is better than expected! Awesome transaction, great communication, boxed priority shipping for 1 raw book - that tells the story right there! KUDOS!!
-
Just bought two sweet old label FF slabs (38 + 51) from Ted - smoooooth transaction. Fast, secure shipping + great communication + sweet books = KUDOS!!
-
You need BlowUpTheMoon to find it, I just tried and cant
http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=6820947&fpart=1
too slow... -
No worries just an FYI I suspect he is reading this thread. He mentioned it before.
I hope so! This transparency should be helpful to him. Hopefully he takes Sharon's very sage advice.
-
..and he was really nice during the charity auction for Trevor.
I didn't think it was too nice when he posted a lowball offer on a book right in Trevor's thread, then said he was just joking...if he was nice after that, it's because he saw the pain coming from that lowball nonsense.
-
Another question about this "hidden poll" approach - is there a way to know how many people have voted in this poll? Can the creator of the poll (i.e., DiceX) see that info?
I don't think it'll be an issue for this particular Menace poll, but in general here's what's on my mind...I'd hate to see an HOS decision made based on extremely low turnout....what if an HOS poll runs its course and we then find out only 12 people voted, or something like that?
Related to this is another thing I was thinking...in addition to the poll duration requirement, should there be a quorum requirement? For example, at least 50 (or some such number, TBD) members must vote for a HOS vote to be binding...
-
I assure you it was said in jest.
Actually not said in jest at all, Steve - I was quite sincere.
However, Hector, I get your point...voters can be uninformed regardless of their membership duration...I agree with that. Not sure how to address the "uninformed veteran voter" issue. Just thinking out loud, in any event...
-
I blame the influx of 2013 noobs voting in a poll they didn't understand.
Although I'm a 2013 noob myself, I'm afraid there's probably some truth to this statement...I was thinking about this when reading the thread the other day. There are posts in this discussion from at least one noob essentially admitting that they voted in an uninformed fashion (i.e., didn't realize the meaning of the HOS). It's similar to the dangers of uninformed voters out there in real society. Makes me think we should discuss some sort of membership duration requirement for voting in HOS polls (similar to the discussion about new members starting sales threads)...although I suspect the technological demands to enforce would be a difficult hurdle. At minimum, maybe this should alert you veterans to how important it is for you to turnout in these polls to overcome the very real "uninformed voter" problem.
-
...tricky business defining "noob"...seems to be a relative term, and Chris has been here since '03.
-
I'm pretty sure you're still a noob, as well...as am I
-
I was suggesting a variation on a veteran member's idea.
Don't be so sure that Chris sees it that way...Chris probably views that "veteran member" as a noob as well, since he's "only" been here since 2011...tricky business defining "noob"...seems to be a relative term, and Chris has been here since '03. Just keep contributing and don't let it agitate you...that just stokes the flames.
-
-
I emulated behavior I had seen. Seemed acceptable. Was approved by seller. Someone else observed and emulated me. Seemed okay, he'd seen someone else do it. Then we learn, it's not okay; indeed, it's not an accepted norm.
And now someone gets facepalmed for trying to follow what seemed like observable norms.
My
was made in a larger context...this logic of 'doing something because someone else is doing it' has been used a lot aroun... oh, forget it.If you look at my post, I wasn't even facepalming you. But now that you have engaged me, let me ask you...If you were indeed looking for at least a VF+ copy of X-Men 51 for your collection, why did you hammer down the 'take it' on Dale's VF- copy?
edit: OOOH...trigger happiness...read back and got it...
-
I thought I saw someone else do this earlier in the thread,I did it because I saw someone else do it
-
don't want to get my message lost in the translation. I did not say that he violated a rule, but that he did not provide the necessary information to have his sales thread be more successful.The seller was not breaking any rules. All the threadcrappers were breaking the rules and apparently were also unaware of both how to inform the seller to conform to the rules and the rules themselves.That doesn't excuse the threadcrapping in the slightest.
-
while I am not a fan of thread krapping and believe that PMs are there for a reason, we should not neglect the sellers inability to properly set up his sales thread from the start.
What marketplace rule did he violate? I didn't see one...
-
I feel bad for the guy who has been here over 1 1/2 years, and had his FS thread hijacked.
Yep - reading that thread makes me hope the "no threadcrapping" guidelines aren't starting to become relaxed...
-
Bro, he was just kidding bro.
Yeah...that's it....yeah...just forgot to post up the
yeah. Just kidding around in a charity thread...that's it...
:censored: :censored: :censored: -
-
"Look at me, look at me! I'm a NOOB who LOVES to stir up conversation and controversy"
Not saying any names but there's a few of you.
The Marketplace has been working successfully even BEFORE Arch revamped the category selection. So what if a seller has primarily GS/SA/BA books in a thread and happens to throw in some CA or DC drek? IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT DON'T BUY IT. We have had enough drama on the Boards, and your insignificant flyspeck complaints are wearisome... go to eBay and take your chances there.
Some if not most of the offenders of the sacred rules you are whining about are offering up books at prices in grade you can't get anywhere else. They could easily just auction them off in CL and be done with it.
Anyone can sell here AT NO COST OR FEES OR BP, and you are complaining about a CA that happened to be listed in the wrong thread or a simultaneous recap of another thread b/c the seller has two separate FS threads running? Grab some tissue and stop crying.
Keep it up. When the marketplace gets taken away you can FINALLY boast that you affected change on the Boards. You will also be the first to whine when you can no longer buy/sell books on the Boards.
Just sayin....
I'm assuming that you're referring to me. If not, you can understand how I might make that assumption. I didn't realize that raising a concern for discussion in the marketplace general discussion thread (which was created just for that purpose) was "stirring up controversy." Your points are duly noted. Thank you for that opinion.
) 
too slow... 
PROBATION DISCUSSIONS
in Marketplace Probations
Posted
This thing wouldn't need to be structured as a "scarlet letter" list that people are "added" to. It would accomplish the same end if we just kept the institutional memory of the probation list historical activity in an easy to access summarized location. That is, simply keep a documented "list" of probation list removals. Simply something like this:
Stickie this thing at the top of the discussion area, just next to the thread that contains the actual PL. If this was easy to access, it would be trivial for me to see that Boardie X has been on the PL twice, and I can use that information as I see fit. Tough to argue with simply trying to summarize instutional history. This wouldn't have the connotation of putting someone on a list, but the info is there nonetheless.