Get Marwood & I

The second comment in today's Times supplement made me laugh Ken (Robin Dickson): The lack of support for Capaldi here - and everywhere else it seems - has me constantly mystified though, I have to say.

We seem to be having a moderation discussion outside of the moderation discussion thread, again, so any value / outcome will be lost as, in time, people will forget where it took place. That said, my contribution to the discussion on this is that I think the community can police itself, with the occasional prod from moderation when things get out of hand. The 'that's what she said' brigade started up in one of the threads I created a while back, I asked them nicely to take it elsewhere and to be fair they did. As far as its wider use goes, if it were me, as moderator, and I felt that phrase was becoming a problem, I would tell the individuals who I felt were making it a problem, privately, what I expected of them. That would be my right, as moderator. They could discuss it with me, and maybe change my mind, but my decision would be final. If they then complained to me the first time someone else used the phrase, claiming inconsistency, I would remind them that the repetition from them was the issue, not the occasional one off use. All we need, I think, are general cues from moderation and targeted advices to those who are pushing the boundaries. The people who get to decide what the boundaries are, and who has overstepped them, are the moderation staff. If we don't like that, we can discuss it with them. If their decision still stands, that's it. @CGC Mike Mike - the phrase in question is a reference to popular culture. Are you saying that the perceived offence to women associated with that phrase is the issue, and therefore it should not be used at all here, or was your intention to try to just regulate it's overuse? If the latter, that is the general cue to all members - don't post the same thing a 100 times a week, whether it is this phrase, a gif or some other comment. Be reasonable. If it is the former however, I would make it a rule in the Moderation framework and then moderate those who break it.

Don't worry about it. We're all here for the same reason, we all get annoyed or angry every once in a while. And if you have followed me 'fighting the good fight', you'll know that I hate it when we all suffer because the powers that be can't target the actions of a few in isolation (see likes removal). A discussion would drive out the true intentions here. I don't think it's as straightforward as "don't say the following words" and you'll see Mike didn't threaten points or anything. I think he's trying to encourage people to just calm down a bit where they go overboard with the same thing all the time. When I first joined I went on a gif rampage and got on everyone's nerves. It came to a head and one of the elder statesmen gave me a right talking to. I was all indignant at the time, but I now see he was right. If I post the same phrase a hundred times everywhere to the amusement of a small group, that small group find it hilarious. But others don't and Mike is trying to find the balance I think. It isn't about stopping other peoples fun. It's just a gentle coax to say, "calm down a bit". If it works, I'm sure you will get to use the phrase judiciously, and we'll all laugh.

That's the spirit Namtak.

I think it is worth debating, in the moderation discussion forum. You say yourself that it is 'out of control' and Mike is here to control. So saying his decision is '100% wrong', respectfully, isn't a great debating tactic Bird. There is a discussion to be had about the overuse of the same phrases and gifs. If I see the 'boy that escalated quickly' meme one more time I will punch the screen. That kind of thing. If we had some gentle guidance, and people used their heads, we wouldn't have to have the rule. But it can't be productive for a member to post the same phrase 100 times a week, if the use of that phrase misses the point of why it would be used in the first place. Use it wisely, selectively, it's funny. Use it just in response to everything and anything, it's boring and irritating. Not to everyone, but likely to some. Many, perhaps. A discussion would drive that out.

Indeed. You'd never pick him for the football team would you.

Comics aside, that must have been terrifying full stop Duff. Glad you escaped. I think you're either a comic person or not. If it's in your DNA, you can't give it up, really. Whilst I used to collect mainly Spidey, I realise I'm in love with the medium. I'm never happier, never calmer than when I'm immersed in comic related activity. I spent an hour or so slowly prising a price sticker off an old sixties romance comic yesterday, just to prove - and preserve - what was underneath. Then it was added to the spreadsheet, ticked off the list, scanned and filed and then I made a nice custom sticker for it and put him with his mates. And then I found an old Tales of Suspense online with, at last, the final UK indicia image that I needed to conclude some research. Documents were updated, images were captured, lists were ticked off. I can't really afford those books anymore, but I can still gather and document information about them. The good thing is that I was happy and I didn't think about anything else while I was doing it.

Posting error? It's a Holy terror.

That was a disappointment. I was hoping for a few of the early T&P missing list titles too.

I'll be watching. Maybe he just didn't like them.

I bequeathed my Charltons too. They bequeathed them back.

Not too shabby for a brief review. Imagine if we did a detailed one.

I've posted my thoughts on this subject in quite a few threads now down the years, so it is clearly something that many collectors come to ponder - what to do when you have a wobble, what to do when you have reached your goals, what to do as you edge nearer to the exit door. Have a read of this post here UncleA, and the links with it: https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/471133-a-brief-review-of-the-first-official-uk-distribution-of-us-published-comics-in-19591960/?do=findComment&comment=12053514 They may help guide your thoughts. I think we are all different, but in no particular order, these are some of the things I would consider: Even the most rabid collector can one day feel jaded enough to sell. But it doesn't automatically mean that selling is the right thing to do, as the collecting bug can, and usually does, return. Put some space between the point you decide you are wobbling and any decision making. You may feel differently after a break and there is no regret greater than selling something you later come to regret selling Selling can be as enjoyable as collecting. Money allows you to do other things Owning an expensive collection - certainly one that has exploded in value - can be a huge pressure: Is it insured? What if I'm burgled? What if the house floods, or is burnt down? Who has the burden of selling it when I'm gone? Notwithstanding any instructions that I leave, what if they sell it to a dealer I despise for tuppence? Or they die too, and it all goes to landfill If it's to be sold, at least let me have the pleasure of seeing it - they are my damn comics, after all You need time, space and energy to collect. And money: What do you do when you run out of space? What if you can no longer afford what you want to buy? What if illness strikes, making it difficult for you to collect? What if you are tired of spending hours searching for things that never materialise? Is there more to life than sitting in front of a computer screen? Are you collecting for the right reasons: Do you buy things because you like them, or out of habit? I may put a run of a title together, but I don't actually like half of them That variant cover is how much? There are how many variants of that one? Do you love comics, or characters? Can a Spidey completist sell everything and then collect Charlton romance? Do you ever look at them? Read them? Show them off? What purpose do locked away books that you are afraid to touch serve? Is it possible to have one thing that represents the thing you loved? I sold a full Andru run of comics. One page of framed original art is my reminder of what I did, my discussion point What actually are the options available: Stop collecting, sell everything Stop collecting, keep everything Sell the majority, keep the best, use the sale proceeds to supplement the best Some other combination. Does it have to be all or nothing? Investment - when is the best time to sell? If your collection is worth £100K today, and you sell it, £100K goes into the Bank. If prices double in a few years, you've lost £100K and probably won't have recovered anywhere near that through investing the cash If you don't need the money, why sell if everything is going up? If you do need the cash, accept that there is never a good time to sell books that look like they will go up in value forever. If you hold off selling for fear of picking the wrong point in the market, you eventually die without selling. There isn't a collector or dealer alive who hasn't kicked the chair after selling on Monday what then doubled in value on Tuesday, usually because of some tenuous event like a film coming out or some pillock spending $4M on a related book Only you can decide what works for you. Everyone is different, everyone has different priorities. I sold one of the best Spider-Man collections on the planet. Not best in the sense of grades, but the most complete. I regret selling some of it, but not all. I wish I had keep certain runs, certain types. But I didn't. I sold because I was uncomfortable having so much money tied up in a few fragile things. I sold because, at the time, I was confident that I had extracted all the pleasure out of it. I loved putting it together, I loved selling it. And I sold because I had no more space. And I had no friends interested in them. I hadn't found this place at that point. I would have loved to show some of it off here, among the like minded. I also sold because I was jaded. Did any of that help? Probably not, being a bit of a brain dump. Sorry.

Thanks Albert, you're on the ball with this one mate. I don't know if Ian's death was premature, or unexpected, but it's such a shame that he doesn't get to see any of this. It's one of the reasons I think collectors should at least consider the latter part of their careers and consider suitable down sizing while they have the time and energy. We can all pass at a moments notice of course, but if the natural course of events unfold, I would want to see my collection liquidated to a reasonable degree if it was me. And I certainly wouldn't want my loved ones to face that burden. Quite sad really, isn't it. Think of how long it took him to build that collection. And now he doesn't even get to see what happens to it. Death is so damn inconvenient isn't it. Let's hope the books go to good, loving homes. And still no one has spotted the addition to his FF#1.

Here's an odd one, which I saw with a 99p start on eBay and hoped to snag. It went too high in the end, but here are the seller's photos: Straight away you see the tell tale sun fade price sticker mark - here is a close up compared to a separate copy on the bay: It looks like the sun fade has taken some of the colouring away, reducing the depth of the pink background, as you would expect. But look at the rest of the cover. Superman, and the title wording have gone from blue to grey.... ....but the red's and yellows remain vibrant. Reds and yellows are supposed to go first, in sun light, aren't they? So what we have here appears to be another of those 'grey' DC print variations with later sun fade to boot. But, again, if the sun fade took out the background pink (as evidenced by the sticker mark) why didn't it get to work on the yellow and red parts of that cover too? Something to do with the inks used I wonder? Is 'impervious yellow' a DC thing? Here are the back covers to both copies, for reference: Sun Fade Copy 'Regular' Copy

Nice to see him back and it all looks promising. New cast, new setting, new soundtrack (mostly) but I can see where it could go and hope they can recreate something as affecting as the first four seasons which, to me, were some of the best telly I have ever seen. Killing potty mouth was a disaster for me, but at least we get to see her again in her new, albeit imagined, advisory role.

Tragedy is a good way of putting it. Living and dying by the sword is one thing, but we get enough of that in the real world. In the world of pretend, where you have a choice, give them what they deserve. This isn't Get Carter. It's Bond, and there is a template. The channelling of deep emotions of personal and collective injustice as a finale belongs elsewhere. For me, it's an unforgiveable misstep. Up until that point, it was beautiful. I would so much have preferred to come away with a sense of justice. You did all this for us. You lost so much along the way. And normally, you'd expect to go yourself and follow Felix into that great espionage cloud in the sky. That's the life. But get this, you escape. You find the happiness that has eluded you all your life. You fill that void. And you escape. We'd all be sad that we won't see him again of course, but happy that he found happiness. Lasting happiness, after the tragedy of Vesper. Five films with various degrees of excellence, but with one towering presence at the heart. I didn't want my enduring sense to be one of injustice for that character, his friends, colleagues and loved ones. I'll shut up now.

Very true Albert. It's no fun being on the wrong side of it. A good reason to make sure we have our affairs in order, prior to the final tour. Make sure our loved ones don't get left with a huge comic sized headache.

That's appalling. What is wrong with people?

Yeah, the Thor looks lousy

I requested a condition report on the AF#15: Thank you for your enquiry about lot 1124 - Marvel Comics, in The Ian Penman Collection of Silver Age and Bronze Age American Comics on 16/11/2021.Condition report:Condition: GD+/VG-No restoration,Spine rub and small spine creases near staples on front cover; single vertical centre crease to front cover and light wrinkling/creasing at top right. Colour is excellent and a reasonable amount of gloss is still present.Rear cover has a central blemish which is perhaps the result of hot ironing; there is slight yellowing particularly down the spine edge.Generally good interior with Stan Lee's dedication to Ian at the top of page 1 (as a journalist, Ian interviewed Stan Lee in America and wrote about him circa 1976). There is a small section of page 1 torn away at lower right edge (see close-up photograph on our website catalogue.)Generally good near-white interior pages with hints of yellowing at some edges.Overall, a nice above-average copy. https://www.andersonandgarland.com/auction/lot/lot-1124---marvel-comics/?lot=275442&so=0&st=amazing fantasy&sto=0&au=471&ef=&et=&ic=False&sd=0&pp=100&pn=1&g=-1 They have added more pictures now, and noted a Stan Lee inscription. The pictures show the cover being folded back quite harshly and an erroneous JIM interior. Going for it, aren't they.

A circle of missing yellow ink at the top - not so pronounced in my example here, but I had a lower cut copy where it was very visual: Barrel scraping to some, but I used to enjoy collecting printing anomalies, however subtle.

No, I still fundamentally disagree with it and can't shake the sense of injustice.

I see, so we don't have Bedrock to thank for it after all. Thanks.

Add you voice here Oak, and it will be heard: https://boards.cgccomics.com/topic/498242-can’t-login-to-boards-on-my-laptop/#comment-12041842