Poll...Should Pressing be Disclosed?

[burntboy]

Of course pressing is restoration. The book is being tweaked to it's former glory. It's the negative connotation that resto has that has groups like cgc changing the definition to suit an evolving business model.

 

I'd like Black Hand to respond to this if he has a mind to; (and i am NOT trying to confuse the issue, as i'm serious)

 

If someone uses their fingernail to remove a NCB crease on the corner of a book (as has been demonstrated successfully on these very boards), is that restoration???

 

If someone uses just their hands (and the slight heat inherent in that procedure) to undo a wave in a cover, is that restoration???

 

If someone removes some chocolate sauce from a cover by using a letter opener to flick it off, is that restoration???

 

f someone uses a soft eraser or wonder bread to remove some dirt/ink transfer from a book, is that restoration???

 

In my 5 years experience on these boards, the typical response from most boardies would be NO...yet the books have been "Tweaked" with the express intention of returning them closer to their original state.

 

SO just who gets to decide that pressing is resto and the rest are not??? Who gets to draw that line???

 

Thank you in advance for a considered response...

 

 

 

 

What do these questions have to do with disclosure of pressing?

 

Kind of the response I expected, but I'm still disappointed.

 

Even JC made a real attempt to respond and parry my obvious argument.

 

Sorry for wasting your time...BUT, just try reading the message again, look carefully at what YOU said that I quoted and then think about what my statements had to do with what YOU said; "of course pressing is resto, the book is being "tweaked" to it's former glory"...got it, yet???

 

All of the other things that i outlined are "tweaks" to return a book to it's former glory, but based on 5 years of reading these boards fairly religiously, i can say that NO ONE feels they are resto.

 

WHY??

[gaz973]

Of course pressing is restoration. The book is being tweaked to it's former glory. It's the negative connotation that resto has that has groups like cgc changing the definition to suit an evolving business model.

 

I'd like Black Hand to respond to this if he has a mind to; (and i am NOT trying to confuse the issue, as i'm serious)

 

If someone uses their fingernail to remove a NCB crease on the corner of a book (as has been demonstrated successfully on these very boards), is that restoration???

 

If someone uses just their hands (and the slight heat inherent in that procedure) to undo a wave in a cover, is that restoration???

 

If someone removes some chocolate sauce from a cover by using a letter opener to flick it off, is that restoration???

 

f someone uses a soft eraser or wonder bread to remove some dirt/ink transfer from a book, is that restoration???

 

In my 5 years experience on these boards, the typical response from most boardies would be NO...yet the books have been "Tweaked" with the express intention of returning them closer to their original state.

 

SO just who gets to decide that pressing is resto and the rest are not??? Who gets to draw that line???

 

Thank you in advance for a considered response...

 

 

 

 

What do these questions have to do with disclosure of pressing?

 

Kind of the response I expected, but I'm still disappointed.

 

Even JC made a real attempt to respond and parry my obvious argument.

 

Sorry for wasting your time...BUT, just try reading the message again, look carefully at what YOU said that I quoted and then think about what my statements had to do with what YOU said; "of course pressing is resto, the book is being "tweaked" to it's former glory"...got it, yet???

 

All of the other things that i outlined are "tweaks" to return a book to it's former glory, but based on 5 years of reading these boards fairly religiously, i can say that NO ONE feels they are resto.

 

WHY??

 

Geez, I give an honest response to your question and get ignored.

 

Don't know why I bother sometimes.

[The Black Hand ®]

Of course pressing is restoration. The book is being tweaked to it's former glory. It's the negative connotation that resto has that has groups like cgc changing the definition to suit an evolving business model.

 

I'd like Black Hand to respond to this if he has a mind to; (and i am NOT trying to confuse the issue, as i'm serious)

 

If someone uses their fingernail to remove a NCB crease on the corner of a book (as has been demonstrated successfully on these very boards), is that restoration???

 

If someone uses just their hands (and the slight heat inherent in that procedure) to undo a wave in a cover, is that restoration???

 

If someone removes some chocolate sauce from a cover by using a letter opener to flick it off, is that restoration???

 

f someone uses a soft eraser or wonder bread to remove some dirt/ink transfer from a book, is that restoration???

 

In my 5 years experience on these boards, the typical response from most boardies would be NO...yet the books have been "Tweaked" with the express intention of returning them closer to their original state.

 

SO just who gets to decide that pressing is resto and the rest are not??? Who gets to draw that line???

 

Thank you in advance for a considered response...

 

 

 

 

What do these questions have to do with disclosure of pressing?

 

Kind of the response I expected, but I'm still disappointed.

 

Even JC made a real attempt to respond and parry my obvious argument.

 

Sorry for wasting your time...BUT, just try reading the message again, look carefully at what YOU said that I quoted and then think about what my statements had to do with what YOU said; "of course pressing is resto, the book is being "tweaked" to it's former glory"...got it, yet???

 

All of the other things that i outlined are "tweaks" to return a book to it's former glory, but based on 5 years of reading these boards fairly religiously, i can say that NO ONE feels they are resto.

 

WHY??

 

Geez, I give an honest response to your question and get ignored.

 

Don't know why I bother sometimes.

 

He doesn't want to hear your answer.

[burntboy]

Of course pressing is restoration. The book is being tweaked to it's former glory. It's the negative connotation that resto has that has groups like cgc changing the definition to suit an evolving business model.

 

I'd like Black Hand to respond to this if he has a mind to; (and i am NOT trying to confuse the issue, as i'm serious)

 

If someone uses their fingernail to remove a NCB crease on the corner of a book (as has been demonstrated successfully on these very boards), is that restoration???

 

If someone uses just their hands (and the slight heat inherent in that procedure) to undo a wave in a cover, is that restoration???

 

If someone removes some chocolate sauce from a cover by using a letter opener to flick it off, is that restoration???

 

f someone uses a soft eraser or wonder bread to remove some dirt/ink transfer from a book, is that restoration???

 

In my 5 years experience on these boards, the typical response from most boardies would be NO...yet the books have been "Tweaked" with the express intention of returning them closer to their original state.

 

SO just who gets to decide that pressing is resto and the rest are not??? Who gets to draw that line???

 

Thank you in advance for a considered response...

 

 

 

 

What do these questions have to do with disclosure of pressing?

 

Kind of the response I expected, but I'm still disappointed.

 

Even JC made a real attempt to respond and parry my obvious argument.

 

Sorry for wasting your time...BUT, just try reading the message again, look carefully at what YOU said that I quoted and then think about what my statements had to do with what YOU said; "of course pressing is resto, the book is being "tweaked" to it's former glory"...got it, yet???

 

All of the other things that i outlined are "tweaks" to return a book to it's former glory, but based on 5 years of reading these boards fairly religiously, i can say that NO ONE feels they are resto.

 

WHY??

 

Geez, I give an honest response to your question and get ignored.

 

Don't know why I bother sometimes.

 

Sorry but i was really concentrating on the NON-RESPONSE that i got from Black Hand. (and a second time too, it appears...).

 

Insofar as your response, i can't disagree with what you said except for the statement about the type/degree of tweaking being acceptable if somewhat like what the book would have experienced in it's normal lifetime. not sure a letter opener, wonderbread or soft erasers should ever be considered something a comic might usually run into...

 

at least both you and JC responded to my question - thanks... (thumbs u

 

But here's the deal,

[gaz973]

Of course pressing is restoration. The book is being tweaked to it's former glory. It's the negative connotation that resto has that has groups like cgc changing the definition to suit an evolving business model.

 

I'd like Black Hand to respond to this if he has a mind to; (and i am NOT trying to confuse the issue, as i'm serious)

 

If someone uses their fingernail to remove a NCB crease on the corner of a book (as has been demonstrated successfully on these very boards), is that restoration???

 

If someone uses just their hands (and the slight heat inherent in that procedure) to undo a wave in a cover, is that restoration???

 

If someone removes some chocolate sauce from a cover by using a letter opener to flick it off, is that restoration???

 

f someone uses a soft eraser or wonder bread to remove some dirt/ink transfer from a book, is that restoration???

 

In my 5 years experience on these boards, the typical response from most boardies would be NO...yet the books have been "Tweaked" with the express intention of returning them closer to their original state.

 

SO just who gets to decide that pressing is resto and the rest are not??? Who gets to draw that line???

 

Thank you in advance for a considered response...

 

 

 

 

What do these questions have to do with disclosure of pressing?

 

Kind of the response I expected, but I'm still disappointed.

 

Even JC made a real attempt to respond and parry my obvious argument.

 

Sorry for wasting your time...BUT, just try reading the message again, look carefully at what YOU said that I quoted and then think about what my statements had to do with what YOU said; "of course pressing is resto, the book is being "tweaked" to it's former glory"...got it, yet???

 

All of the other things that i outlined are "tweaks" to return a book to it's former glory, but based on 5 years of reading these boards fairly religiously, i can say that NO ONE feels they are resto.

 

WHY??

 

Geez, I give an honest response to your question and get ignored.

 

Don't know why I bother sometimes.

 

Sorry but i was really concentrating on the NON-RESPONSE that i got from Black Hand. (and a second time too, it appears...).

 

Insofar as your response, i can't disagree with what you said except for the statement about the type/degree of tweaking being acceptable if somewhat like what the book would have experienced in it's normal lifetime. not sure a letter opener, wonderbread or soft erasers should ever be considered something a comic might usually run into...

 

at least both you and JC responded to my question - thanks... (thumbs u

 

But here's the deal,

 

Thanks for the response.

 

I would concede that the instances you mention could be in a grey area which would be open to debate but I think that the "far beyond normal circumstances" that pressing brings to a book take it well out of the grey area.

 

In my opinion, pressing is restoration. I'll always listen to other points of view though (at least the sensible ones).

[The Black Hand ®]

61 to 27 so far on the question of Disclosure.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

61 to 27 so far on the question of Disclosure.

 

More buyers then sellers/flippers...

[Green]

35+ years from now? probable.

Wishful thinking.

Far from it. I wish for the sake of comic collectors that it can never be detected so if it was wishful thinking it wouldnt be mine. There is a market for unpressed books, that is undeniable. The void will be filled. somehow. 35 years is a looong time for technology to develop.

[DrWatson]

35+ years from now? probable.

Wishful thinking.

Far from it. I wish for the sake of comic collectors that it can never be detected so if it was wishful thinking it wouldnt be mine. There is a market for unpressed books, that is undeniable. The void will be filled. somehow. 35 years is a looong time for technology to develop.

Yes it is. Where is my flying car?

[Old Fashion PB and J]

35+ years from now? probable.

Wishful thinking.

Far from it. I wish for the sake of comic collectors that it can never be detected so if it was wishful thinking it wouldnt be mine. There is a market for unpressed books, that is undeniable. The void will be filled. somehow. 35 years is a looong time for technology to develop.

Yes it is. Where is my flying car?

 

The jetsons must have really made alot of people sad in the end. Kids figured by 2000 they would have flying cars, robot maids, and talking dogs.

 

Instead they got short,bald,fat, obnoxious bosses... Damned half truths

[jkrk]

1) I believe the overwhelming concensus of comic buyers believe that pressing should be disclosed while most sellers disagree.

 

2) I wonder how many pro disclosure posters (other than myself) believe that if you acquire a warehouse find

 

of 1000 9.8's that should be disclosed to potential buyers as well?

 

 

[burntboy]

61 to 27 so far on the question of Disclosure.

 

 

this is getting to be borderline hysterical - when you guys don't like the poll results you are either quiet or tell us how the poll isn't actuarially reliable or skewed because of thus and so...

 

when you guys like the results you begin posting them...

 

Let me state it one more time to be absolutely clear; Overstreet, CGC and the members of this forum have spoken - Pressing is NOT restoration...

 

You want disclosure - fine, get off your lazy Azzes and ask...

[Hawkman]

hell yes it should be.

 

i don't care if a book has been pressed, but at least be honest and upfront. it tells me what kind of seller you are. it's just the decent thing to do.

[The Black Hand ®]

61 to 27 so far on the question of Disclosure.

 

 

this is getting to be borderline hysterical - when you guys don't like the poll results you are either quiet or tell us how the poll isn't actuarially reliable or skewed because of thus and so...

 

when you guys like the results you begin posting them...

 

Let me state it one more time to be absolutely clear; Overstreet, CGC and the members of this forum have spoken - Pressing is NOT restoration...

 

You want disclosure - fine, get off your lazy Azzes and ask...

 

66-28 in favor of disclosure so far.

[sakaridis]

61 to 27 so far on the question of Disclosure.

 

 

this is getting to be borderline hysterical - when you guys don't like the poll results you are either quiet or tell us how the poll isn't actuarially reliable or skewed because of thus and so...

 

when you guys like the results you begin posting them...

 

Let me state it one more time to be absolutely clear; Overstreet, CGC and the members of this forum have spoken - Pressing is NOT restoration...

 

You want disclosure - fine, get off your lazy Azzes and ask...

 

66-28 in favor of disclosure so far.

 

[Transplant]

So does this poll and spiderman-on-tilt's pseudo poll establish that sellers should be proactively disclosing? Most people have argued that no one cares. Seems from these results that people believe sellers should disclose pressing without being asked, regardless of whether they're anti/pro pressing, is/not resto, etc.

[burntboy]

So does this poll and spiderman-on-tilt's pseudo poll establish that sellers should be proactively disclosing? Most people have argued that no one cares. Seems from these results that people believe sellers should disclose pressing without being asked, regardless of whether they're anti/pro pressing, is/not resto, etc.

 

I think what it "establishes" is that in this small corner of the comic universe, disclosure of pressing is clearly more desirable than non-disclosure.

 

I also believe that you can read between the lines (poll wasn't explicit) and surmise that "Pro-active" disclosure is more desirable that "reactive" disclosure.

 

Of course for the hobby as a whole, it "establishes" nothing...

 

In summary (via poll results) for this Month's CGC Board's "Great Pressing Debate";

 

1. Pressing is not restoration.

 

2. Disclosure of pressing is required.

 

3. Said disclosure should be Proactive.

 

Check in next month for new results....

 

 

[FlyingDonut]

[Flaming_Telepath]

 

Ah, another thread that has nothing to do with this morning's. (thumbs u

 

Got any more?

[FlyingDonut]

 

Ah, another thread that has nothing to do with this morning's. (thumbs u

 

Got any more?

 

Like I said in the other post, I think these most definitely do have relevance. The same trend lines show over time - nobody really cares if a book is pressed, but people want disclosure.