RockMyAmadeus

I hope so, too. For your sake, for my sake, and for the board's sake. Starting fights with people is creating the very drama you claim to be against. There's a difference...and it's a clear one...between starting a fight and defending one's self. I genuinely hope you discover that difference, and find the happiness you seek.

There was blue dong in Watchmen, the series, yes.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

via Imgflip Meme Generator

via Imgflip Meme Generator

via Imgflip Meme Generator

via Imgflip Meme Generator via Imgflip Meme Generator

It could be a Dog Like Sparky.. Huh...? HUH?? Think about it....!

meow.

There are some interesting theories in this thread. I look forward to this.

I would be happy to do so, and, indeed, have done so with you for many months. However...if you refuse to ignore me, and insist on creating drama on the boards, what choice do I have but to address it? You're clearly unhappy here. For your mental health's sake, isn't there a place that is more suited to your needs and desires? Maybe you could start your own forum? I worry about you, Dog Like Sparky. :*(

Smeagol's offended, and on the rampage now. I better watch out.

Instigator.

And we're off. You complain about an awful lot on this board, and you have since the beginning of your time here. One would think, if one found so much to complain about, that there are other places that might make you happier...? Why is it, when you have the tools to control what you do and do not see, and moderation to report to if you feel someone is violating terms, do you feel the need to complain so much, and make this board a less pleasant place to be, for everyone...? Makes no sense. Do you have anything to contribute to the substance of the discussion, or are you just going to complain about that which is entirely in your control?

And just so we're clear, here's your original quote, which I believe is erroneous, because it doesn't include the "dump" portion of the phrase. I'm pretty sure the definition of "pump and dump" has nothing to do with an individual opinion about a particular book having "no" collectability (sic) or speculation value (since every comic has that potential), and everything to do with someone who discusses or highlights a particular item to raise interest in it (aka "The Pump"), with the undisclosed intention of selling that item in the near future to capitalize on the increased interest he/she created (aka "The Dump.") "Collectability (sic) or speculation value" is thoroughly irrelevant to that definition. If that is your understanding of "pump and dump", then your other comments about it make more sense: your understanding is flawed. I could be wrong. I welcome dissenting opinion on the matter.

If I'm not talking about you personally, you're not being harassed. If you have the opportunity to, and do, respond, you're not being harassed. Challenging your ideas is not "harassment." You didn't answer my question, so I'll ask again: Who decides what has "no collectability (sic) or speculation value"...? How is that determined? Who gets to determine that, and by what authority are they determining it? Your "definition" of "speculation value" is a non-answer: it says something without saying anything. Who determines what "has the ability to increase in value due to art, content, demand, etc..."? How is such a determination made, and by what authority do you make it? Doesn't ANY comic book, by that definition, have "speculation value"? Why, or why not? These are all straightforward questions; questions you, yourself, have asked of others in the past. And the phrase is "cut-and-dried", for your edification.

I like many features of the new journals.

We just need to give the rings to Frodo. He'll get them to Mount Doom, and then we'll be done with them.

Lovely!

Which also, by the way, brings up the other very old discussion, which was "stigmatization" in the first place. Different colored labels (to denote problems) was always a mistake. It created negative associations for people that weren't necessary.

Yes, because you can get similar, or even the same, results from stacking that you can from the pressing process...it just takes a much longer time...and since you can't determine intent, it was foolish and dangerous to state "this book has been pressed" if it had just sat under a stack for 30 years. The absence of flaws, even tiny ones, does not necessarily indicate the presence of a press. By the way...my original owner copies of books I bought in the early 90s, that have sat in their bags and boards for 25+ years? Flat as flat can be, and never saw the inside of a press.

Sweet. RK #17 is a tough book in general, three different font variations is pretty interesting.