VintageComics

He's just become a waste of anybody's time in this place. He's had enough time to clean up his act and has proven that he isn't even going to try.

I posted something and it was pulled too. If he got a warning previously he'll probably have a strike coming. What a dork.

Whoah. Really? Being a lifelong X-men fan, there was the original line up and then the new X-men after GSX #1 / X #94 - no question about it. Of course, it's all relative and they are no longer new but for decades when you talked about the new X-men it was clear who you were talking about. The Avengers had established early on that they were a constantly rotating lineup (from issue #1 actually), unlike the X-men or the FF which kept constant lineups for a decade or even decades.

Most people don't realize there's no express right to privacy in the Constitution. We were a country for well over 100 years before court cases even hinted that there might be a right to be divined through cobbling pieces of the document together, but there's still nothing there that expressly gives us the right to privacy. It wasn't until the mid-60's that the supreme court came up with a way to say that married couples could use contraception in the privacy of their own home. The right to privacy is a topic that has been discussed in the WC from time to time, from a 'big brother / government POV. Some people believe the right to privacy shouldn't exist, the reasoning being that if you aren't doing something wrong you have nothing to worry about. I tend to agree although I also worry about corruption and misuse of that information. But as far a comics go, it's an emotional hobby. We've probably all been bent out of shape over a deal at one point or another. I know l have unfortunately.

That would be fun but I don't think the seller is obligated to show anything, unless of course there is a pattern of shady behavior or reaon to doubt them. In that case it's a different matter and in everyone's best interest. At the risk of becoming a nuisance, how does the community set the bar for patterns of 'shady behavior' or 'reasons to doubt?' How do you know when it's appropriate to demandi someone to something in the best interest of everyone? Dan I would say that if someone has reaaon to believe a seller is shady based on being caught red handed in some scenario (like shill bidding, lying, or misrepresentation) then you would have cause to doubt someone's word when they state a book was sold via PM. But to just outright distrust someone because they missed out on a deal is not really going to cut it. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Especially in a small hobby where reputation is everything. And I think it bears repeating here that the proper way of dealing with a dispute (and this goes for any dispute) IMO is to ALWAYS approach the individual first and f no resolution can be found, THEN if that doesn't work, as a last resort, you make it public. But just ripping someone a new one in public without approaching them privately first rarely mends things and in general, lots of chest thumping is the main result. Because most of us are dudes and don't like getting back into a corner. Because testosterone.

Doing pushups as we speak. I'm going to be #1!

That would be fun but I don't think the seller is obligated to show anything, unless of course there is a pattern of shady behavior or reaon to doubt them. In that case it's a different matter and in everyone's best interest.

.... I'm not even sure how to DO a screen shot, much less to black out segments of it. I'm a dinosaur. However, if someone confronted me about a PM sale, I would view that as a question of my integrity, which I do not accept lightly. GOD BLESS.... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u More importantly, the seller has ZERO obligation to prove anything. These are comic book sales, people. Not matters of nationall security. If you miss out on a cheap book suck it up and move on.

If it's actual threadcrapping and not being warned of a scam then yes, mods should be notified and people have received wrist slaps for threadcrapping.

Agreed. Superman and Batman make up a small portion of the JLA. Meanwhile, the 3 in SC #54 make up a majority AND they appear just 7 issues later in the same mag, referencing their 1st appearance / team up in the previous issue. The ties between #54 and #60 are much closer than Superman #76 and JLA (or any other similar comparisons). I was going to bring up the Defenders. I was never a reader / follower but they did come to mind as another team that wasn't a team in the strict formulaic sense that others were but they are still without a doubt considered a team.

You keep ascribing new criteria to what constitutes a team. So now they need a headquarters? Membership changes? All that's needed of a team is that they are teamed up together and over a period of time, IMO. I'd have to reread Avengers #1 as it's been a while but is there a headquarters in issue #1?

Yup. They probably grabbed the wrong label color and QC missed it.

better yet, I have a conference in Orlando in a month, I thinking of driving over and go talk to some one face to face about this. seriously over the last four submissions of 15 books there has been at least 1 book (sometimes more) that was messed up... That's a seven to fourteen percent failure rate for me alone. Hell, I have even nicer books that I'm almost afraid to slab because if this and that's just sad. Honestly I'd be embarrassed if I was part of a company produced second-rate workman ship like this. The problem that you are experiencing is nearly impossibly to remedy. If a comic book has an overhang and the book gets jostled in shipping there is a chance that the overhang is going to bend in the holder. That's what happened to the Surfer #4 and the Avengers #58. And since they can't prevent the holder from being jostled once it leaves their hands (no amount of bubblewrap can change the laws of physics) the only other option is to not slab the books and reject them. I could be wrong but that's how I see it.

...and Wally Wood.

Do you know anything about comics?

So was that a second thread started this week?

Blame our very own superhero, the Automatic Man (a.k.a. sfcityduck). That's unfair. There's more than one person who agrees with him (and counting it seems).

I said that at 78. Let's just say the results of this thread and the consensus on which was the first TT will have been thoroughly explored. I only see 31 pages...

Except that the same people reappear, only now under a team name. Which is why #54 is different than #53 or #55.

$13K

What did? I've been in agreement with SFCD's points all along. There is disagreement coming.

Generated in 16.31 seconds in which 16.292 seconds were spent on a total of 26 queries. Zlib compression enabled.

BB #54 was not intended to be the 1st TT but in hindsight it ended up being the 1st TT after they appeared in a 2nd issue in #60. Roy, I hate to disagree with you, but the creators have said that the editorial directive that led to BB 54 was to do a "Junior Justice League" adventure. DC had, in fact, suggested in the letters column of BB years before that a JJLA adventure would be forthcoming in response to fan demand. Haney's recollection is that it was Kashdan who made the directive. Haney said in 1996: "I think it was George Kashdan who first said: 'How about a series starring the kid superheroes?' and that later I was the one who came up with the name Teen Titans. ... It was no great earth shaking creative stroke, taking some already existing house characters and combining them into a team...." Right, I meant that it was not the 1st TT in name as the name had not yet been created. Most of the opposition to BB #54 being the 1st TT seems to stem from the name not yet being announced as the TT in BB #54. The editorial intent was there, the characters were there, the team up was there - the only thing missing was the name. And then BB #60 ran on the coat tails of #54's success and a name was given to a team which had already been formulated 7 issues prior. I think we're in agreement in theory. I just worded it poorly.

Probably time to limit the search function to one week. See if that helps. That happened at about 5 AM EST. The board was obviously busy!

After the startup of the board. Generated in 35.487 seconds in which 35.469 seconds were spent on a total of 9 queries. Zlib compression enabled.