RockMyAmadeus

In the Canadian version, the most expensive property is a sheep farm in Halifax.

I don;t give two damns what your case is, if you think you're above the rules, you're a scumbag. "hoarder_mikes" fits this category by leaving feedback that conflicts with a positive rating. What a slimeball pig. Those of you wondering why sellers can no longer leave negs or neutrals? THIS scumbag is why. Exhibit A1 with a vengeance. You fight this pig, zong, and don't you give up. Pigs like this deserve to be driven out of business.

What an arrogant pig.

Didn't say there were 100s of thousands available. I said there was probably no less than 100k still in existence. There are certainly 50,000 or more Spidey #129s and Hulk #181s, if not more. I just bought a tiny collection of books that happened to have, unbelievably, an FF #48. It was one of about 10 "key" books the guy had, the rest being junk. This particular copy hadn't seen the light of day since the guy bought it as a kid in the early 70s. That particular copy was hidden away for nearly 50 YEARS. And there are copies like that, hidden all over the place, all over the world. And yes, the only thing that matters is availability...but there is enough availability to satisfy general demand. That is, if you want a copy, you can go to any national con and take your pick of copies, at any time of the year. The same isn't true, of course, for a book like Tales of Suspense #1, or Action #7, or Rawhide Kid #17, or....well, you get the idea.

This is a real life example, where you can really interact with the person, and observe them in real life. My point was that such claims can't be made on a message board, based on message board posts alone.

Ha! We always ignored that limit and used lincoln logs and other blocks as additional houses.

I know people who win handily just buying and developing the cheapest side of the board, since no one else "wants it", and dismisses it as the cheap junk...and before you know it, you're stripped of your cash right after you pass "Go."

I've always done well with Marvin Gardens. Not too expensive...but it adds up.

Observations: 1. When one is unwilling to face the reality of who and what they are, they will almost certainly, and without fail, attempt to deflect that reality back on the one doing the exposition. "Yeah, well...well....I know you are, but what am I??" That's not irony; it's just petulance. It's not a rational, measured response; it's a schoolyard taunt. 2.: I am not immune to these things. As I stated above, I have very real flaws, just like everyone else. And despite the lies of fools, I have never tried to pretend otherwise. So, I would imagine the difference, the delineation if you will, is who is willing to acknowledge it...and who is not.

Evasive, non-committal, dismissive, and unwilling to acknowledge when others have a point, as expected. I don't think you are angry, and never said that. If you're going to list "reading comprehension" as a qualification for determining something as serious as whether or not someone is delusional, you should hold yourself to the same standard. You chose to initiate this conversation, so the one replying out of courtesy is me. "There is no condescension in what I said." - so, is this where I say you're delusional if you believe that? I'm not calling you delusional, mind, just applying your standards. Etc, etc, etc. Here is a quote that is absolute brilliance, and is never, ever acknowledged by those to whom it applies: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals." - C. S. Lewis

Oh no. There are certainly more than 10,000 copies of FF #48 in existence. Remember, hoarding on a grand scale started in 1965. That's why there's such a tremendous difference between availability of books like FF #1-10, and books like Iron Man #1-10, despite being separated only by 7 years. People simply stopped throwing away their comics in the mid 60s, and we've never looked back. FF #48 was, in fact, one of those books that you saw on dealer tables, in stacks, for "$1" in the early 70's at shows like San Diego. There are likely 100,000 or more copies of this book extant. It's simply that the demand is greater than the supply.

Awwww...that stings, and I'm not even from NY!

I once received a lot of Spideys from #120-130 that had cat pee staining the lower half of the books...salt crystals and all....that wasn't disclosed.

Yes, as I said before, you practice the very thing you condemn so very, very loudly in others. You condemn others as "delusional", despite having absolutely no qualification to do so, and when someone suggests you reflect, instead of saying "you know, that's good advice. Thank you", you mock. Weren't you condemning others for being incapable of admitting they're wrong....? Do you acknowledge real faults...? Here, I'll go first: I'm a thin-skinned, defensive, insecure know-it-all who is quick to condemn and slow to forgive. Your turn.

Calling someone delusional is not an insult if it's true and so there's nothing to whitewash. You seem to see the world in terms of winning and losing. I just see it as an effort to improve on a spectrum. He's delusional because he's getting tripped up in his own discussion points but won't admit it. It's not rocket science when you read his posts and you don't need a vendetta against someone to disagree with them. Because I don't currently have anyone on ignore using the forum software. I only had one person on ignore with the old software and I don't think that transferred over here (but then I can't see them so I wouldn't know if they posted or not). As far as ignoring you, I generally read your some of your posts as they are informative but won't respond on debates because they seem to go nowhere. It was just a mental fart and I responded. Blame it on a good Saturday night. If you lack the discipline to actually ignore someone, after making a public proclamation that you're doing so, then you're really proving the point. Don't get angry with me; the man you want is in that mirror over there. If you can't interact with people without making condescending personal comments about them...like "you seem to see the world in terms of winning and losing"...well, I'm not even sure you're aware you do it. Will you consider what I have to say, or will you do what you condemn in others, and dismiss it out of hand, because you consider me "beneath you"...? Time will tell... "Calling someone delusional is not an insult if it's true"... Nobody on this board is qualified to call anybody else on this board "delusional." What one may think...and what one may say in private to friends...is entirely different from public proclamations.

Heh heh...that's a funny way you have of "agreeing." Sounds more like you're reallly trying to persuade people to see and do things the way you do, no...? And isn't that what "arguing" is...?

This fits here:

Of course you'll disagree; you were caught doing the very thing...the very thing...you complain so vociferously about others doing. You called someone "delusional" and said they should "seek help", and then tried to whitewash it to not make it sound as bad as it is. Comments for which other people get punishment from moderation. I'm not defending your target. I'm simply saying that making unwelcome and negative personal commentary about others is inappropriate, no matter who does it, and has no place in any civil society. My post wasn't aimed at you, didn't mention you by name, and is applicable to a whole swath of people all over this board. And yet...who replied to that post? And...I'm not quite sure how you "forget" you have someone on ignore. You have to make a conscious effort to see that someone's posts. No matter, let's hope you abide by your public proclamation going forward. Time for a serious self-reflection overhaul. I highly recommend sticking to the topics, rather than the people discussing them.

1. You stated, very publicly, that you were "putting me on ignore." If you didn't mean it, you might want to retract it just as publicly. If you did mean it, I'd suggest actually doing it. 2. Calling someone "delusional" and saying they should "seek help" is not remotely "pointing out someone is tripping over their own feet." No one is in any position to be making psychological diagnoses about anyone else on a message board. 3. The phrase was "personal attacks AND COMMENTARY."

Personal attacks and commentary is never appropriate in any debate about anything. It is "ad hominem", and it is thoroughly and entirely inappropriate, from everyone, all the time. As accurate as the assessment may be and often is, as satisfying as it may be to say it in public, it has no place in a civil society. No one here is in a position to be making judgment calls about other individuals, and doing so makes this place far less pleasant and welcoming. That goes for everyone, myself included. Make your case, make it as well as you can, and leave the personal commentary elsewhere. If you want to tear someone else apart, there are plenty of other places to do that.

Now we're deep into the weeds of interpretation. Do you mean by "reading matter" only words printed on the page, and drawings necessarily and definitively cannot therefore be classified as such? If so, I think that is far beyond the intention of the regulation, and here's my reasoning... According to DMM 173.4.1, items that qualify for Media mail are as follows: As the above lists attest, there are many items that qualify for Media mail that don't consist of ANY reading matter, such as films, recordings, and the like. As well, the operative phrase regarding books is "consisting wholly of reading matter, or reading matter with incidental blank spaces for notations AND containing no advertising material whatsoever. So, the qualification is directly juxtaposed with the prohibition against advertising, which, again, was put in place to prevent the direct mailing from publishers of periodicals to consumers (which is what Second Class mail was designed for.) In other words, the DMM specifically categorizes advertising as "non-reading matter", but nothing else...even pictures. If I understand you correctly, that reading matter has to consist solely of printed words on a page, I don't think that's what the DMM says, nor is that the spirit of the regulation. I'm still not sure why the advertiser having paid for the ads has to do with their longevity.

Now THIS is something I can wholeheartedly agree with. This is an excellent, and perfectly true, observation, but always with the caveat that "unpleasantness" is in the eye of the beholder.

Oh come now. You've been around long enough to know that saying something like "8 pages of argument", without further embellishment, is not going to be seen as an expression of appreciation, regardless of your intent. It is almost universally interpreted as an expression of disdain, not admiration and respect. I have no doubt you find it quite entertaining and interesting; however, those terms are not exclusive to expressions of positive experiences. Lots of people are entertained and interested by housewives flinging pots and pans at each other. I am not stupid; neither are you. The "argument", as you referred to it, didn't begin until page 5. Claiming it has gone on for "8 pages" is therefore an exaggeration, and certainly not going to be seen as, again, an expression of appreciation. I am not stupid; neither are you. This is an expression of subtle contempt. Are you aware of that? I suspect you are. In case you are not, again, this is not an expression of admiration and respect. I'm sure. But what you call having a "terribly thin skin", I call "having a wide open and honest understanding of social cues" and "not being willing to play the social games which cause people to quietly resent one another." All up to interpretation, n'est-ce pas...? If one is going to resent me, I'd much rather it be plain and out in the open, so it can be dealt with, rather than taking the form of passive/aggressive shots at people. There's the operative word - seemed. That was your interpretation of events, and I'm nearly positive that that wasn't my experience in the slightest. As far as being "impressed"...as with "interested" and "entertained", that word, too, is not exclusive to expressions of fraternity and conviviality. Double-edged meanings abound. As far as my dedication to debate...since I am not stupid, and neither are you, I don't debate people when they agree with me, or, to clarify, on the points with which they agree with me. That would be the act of a fool. If someone wishes to converse, or debate, or discuss, or argue, and someone else...regardless of who, why, when, where, or how long...wishes to do the same, what skin is it off the nose of anyone else? As I have said, countless times in the past, "it takes at least TWO people to continue ANY discussion." Again: in the Metropolis is suing Voldy thread, that has gone on for 18 ACTUAL pages, because there are people who wish to continue discussing the topic. It's fairly straightforward, and yes, that's mild condescension. This isn't rocket science, and it's not difficult to understand. And finally...why are you making the discussion about a person (in this case, me) in the first place...? These are rhetorical questions that I know you won't answer, because no one answers them, and the answers are already obvious. There is no place in civil discourse for ad hominem, and yet, this place is filled to the brim with it. Absolutely stuffed to the gills with it. Over and over and over again, when people disagree, they go after the person, rather than the topic. If someone doesn't agree with you, the answer is so incredibly simple: make your case. If you have made your case to the best of your ability, that's that. Pivoting over to discussions of the personalities of the people involved in the debate is bad form, it's childish, and it has no place in rational discourse. Notice...I haven't said a word about you or my opinion of you, other than to acknowledge that you are not stupid. And I do so because this line of "argumentation" is beneath you, as it is beneath everyone. Otherwise...how you debate, what informs your debate, the thickness of your skin, your childhood experiences, your relationship with your father...none of that is anyone else's business, and has absolutely no place in civil (as opposed to "polite") society. You asked that "you are not my enemy, (so) why try to define me as such?", in a post filled with backhanded "compliments." I am not your enemy, nor do I think you are mine. But, given this post, you ought not be surprised if one might tend towards that conclusion. And I say these things BECAUSE I have a measure of respect for you, and treat you as a peer. If I had no respect for you, I wouldn't bother wasting my time laying this out as I have (as, indeed, I don't bother with those I have on ignore.) Excellent! (and I mean that sincerely.) You have chosen that which is important to you. Might it, then, be much more fair of you to not make expressions of subtle contempt...like this one...to those who think and choose differently from you...?

Now I feel like Greggy. So, so dirty.

So how's Demi's sloppy seconds working for you...?