s-dali

I've been following this thread for the longest time now, and I don't recall Brittany M. ever saying that. After researching, the only reply on here that I find from Brittany M. is one where she replies to a comment about an account on September 10th. I have seen people relay information from her, such as to send her pictures of a slab to determine if the newton rings are "excessive", but that is the only comment that I can find from her on this thread. And, I believe the "fix" is to send it back in and they will reholder it. I'm just trying to get the facts straight here and if I am wrong, I'd appreciate being pointed to where and what was said.

Just FYI - in the grading and restoration Issues section, there is a thread about people finding scratches. https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/topic/439180-alot-of-scratches-on-inner-holders-newly-graded/

And seeing a Western comic, I realized we needed a hitching post as well!!

What this thread needs is a comic book post!!!

... as if you have a choice ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3fCX-rE4NU

@01TheDude it looks like you are no longer on his ignore list. LOL!!

That is not what I said. At all. I would explain, but I'm not sure there's value in explaining for the sake of others. Earlier in this thread, you stated "Make no mistake: my argument is theoretical. not practical." Sounds as if you have contradicted yourself. And yes, after discussing this with some people, I decided to continue to post. I did something that I am sure is a new concept to you, I changed my mind.

@RMA, I understand your point about contradictions, but that does not mean the main point is false. You are throwing out the baby with the bath water. I tire of debating this with you. As you've stated, this is all theoretical. There is an inherent aspect to theories, they can be logically debated to death. A theory cannot be proven. Once it is, it ceases to be a theory and becomes fact. As for your disseminating my arguments and labeling them, that is a classic defensive tactic called redirection. Although I'm sure that you will argue that statement also. Have a good weekend bro.

@Skeptic_Kepp - I got upset last night by the wording of RMA's response. He stated that the chart on the blueline website was a bad interpretation of the DMM rules and regulations and that it had been debunked, meaning that it had been proven to be false. How?? How can you PROVE that the chart is false? You can't!!! Just like you can't prove that it is entirely true. To do so would take clear and precise wording in the DMM or clear and precise Customer Support Rulings. We do not have that in regards to the subject of mailing comic books via media mail. Plus, taking what he stated to the next logical step, if the interpretation on an USPS associated site is a bad interpretation and wrong, so is every other interpretation. To me, what he stated was a sign of debating with a very closed minded individual. I have better things to do than waste my time debating with such an individual. My fossil example was a bad one. In my mind, this is more like a court case. Courts are there to interpret the law as it applies to individual cases. In many instances, the laws are cut and dried. In other instance, if you disagree with the interpretation, you can appeal a case. It can go up the chain of courts until it reaches the Supreme Court, which has the final say in interpreting American laws. In this case. the Supreme Court would be the Postmaster General or perhaps a committee, whoever it is that oversees the rules and regulations of the USPS. The blueline site is equivalent, in my mind, to a lower court, perhaps even an appeals court. It is composed of USPS employees whose jobs are dictated by the DMM. These are knowledgeable people, or they should be, when it comes to the inner workings of the USPS. At the very least, they are more knowledgeable about every aspect of the USPS then the average citizen. For all we can tell, that chart could have been made up by a committee or an individual. It may have originated in an USPS office in Washington, DC. But it doesn't matter, to dismiss such a reference so flippantly comes across as arrogant and obnoxious. I hope that helps to explain why I was upset last night.

I have no idea how you can "debunk" an interpretation. Debunk means that you expose the falseness of a statement. That chart is an interpretation. As for the rest of your statement, you just reminded me of why I don't post. To think that a bunch of comic book collectors are in a better position to interpret USPS rules and regulations than actual USPS workers are, is beyond my comprehension. The level of self-righteousness and arrogance is strong on these pages. I think I'll just wait a few more years before I comment on anything else here.

It took me a bit to find this link. This is from littleblue.usps.gov. It is a site that is used by USPS employees and is overseen by the USPS. This is a list that shows that comic books are not allowed and the section of the DMM that they use. If you look at the chart, magazines are not allowed regardless of age. Now, you might say, correctly, that the DMM is the final authority. However, if a website populated by USPS employees interprets something in the DMM that is unclear, I contend that it does carry weight. If each post office had the manpower to open every media mail package, I think you'd see this policy enforced a lot more. https://liteblue.usps.gov/news/link/2013/04apr/Media-Mail-Guidelines.htm

Indeed it does. After all, my statement was meant as positive, meaning that anyone who believes they are right cannot be swayed. I, obviously, believe that I am right, therefore I cannot be swayed. I, too, have spent considerable time researching this subject, I just happened to reach a different conclusion than you did. This situation is not unique. Just look at the debate between creationists and evolutionists over fossils. Both sides have the same evidence, yet they have two completely different interpretations. And those debates are among highly learned men and women, they are hardly ignorant or stupid.

Again, all good points. I know that my interpretation is not the common one expressed by yourself and others on this forum. I have not always been s_dali. I have been reading this forum and its' threads for years. I know that nothing I can say or post here will sway anyone who is convinced they are right. Since the USPS does not directly mention used comic books, this debate will continue. I have stated my position, corrected my error and addressed a legitimate point. From there, it is all a matter of interpretation. One major question is whether or not the internal memo carries any weight. And if it does, the way they worded it can be interpreted two different ways. Even local post offices differ on the policy. Nothing will ever be decided here. Interpret the rules the way you wish, but don't be surprised when someone disagrees.

You are correct in that it was not established for libraries, it was established for educational institutes. I'll edit my original post to reflect that. As for the rest, you make a rational argument. However, I contend that once a periodical, always a periodical is the correct way to interpret this. They do not allow newspapers or magazines, regardless of age, to be sent via media mail. Comic books are no different.

Comic books are not allowed to mailed media mail. Media mail was designed for educational institutes. The USPS does not allow periodicals to mailed by media mail. The first screen shot is from DMM Section 173 that RMA quoted above. The scond screen shot is from the DMM section regarding periodicals, section 207. This has NOTHING to do with advertising. Enforcement of the rule varies greatly.

What I'm taking from this thread is that it is ok to say CBCS now. Can pictures of CBCS slabs be posted now?? And I wonder what will happen if I say CBCS 3 times? Will Voldy himself appear? Let's try it!! CBCS, CBCS, CBCS........