comix4fun Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). It wasn't for the grade it was for the utter and complete lack of tact towards someone just enjoying a book that the love and enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarveySwick Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). It wasn't for the grade it was for the utter and complete lack of tact towards someone just enjoying a book that the love and enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). It wasn't for the grade it was for the utter and complete lack of tact towards someone just enjoying a book that the love and enjoy. Understood. Completely. But this is a free and open exchange. Clearly CGC is soft on this book (and particularly, with its "self-endorsed" signature copies). Any posting outside of a sales thread is an open invitation for comment. And btw, tact is not necessarily a strong suit with internet posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). I don't understand the need to take a dump on someone's book. Ryan obviously scanned it and posted it with a level of pride in his book. You think it was a nice comment to make? "Your book looks like mess, but that just might be me. (thumbs u " No offense, but I actually find this comment more offensive than the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarveySwick Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). I don't understand the need to take a dump on someone's book. Ryan obviously scanned it and posted it with a level of pride in his book. You think it was a nice comment to make? "Your book looks like mess, but that just might be me. (thumbs u " No offense, but I actually find this comment more offensive than the first one. I didn't comment? You asked me "why the facepalm?" and I answered you. I elaborated how I interpreted the original comment with words since the wasn't clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). I don't understand the need to take a dump on someone's book. Ryan obviously scanned it and posted it with a level of pride in his book. You think it was a nice comment to make? "Your book looks like mess, but that just might be me. (thumbs u " No offense, but I actually find this comment "interpretation" more offensive than the first one. I didn't comment? You asked me "why the facepalm?" and I answered you. I elaborated how I interpreted the original comment with words since the wasn't clear. There. Better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarveySwick Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 So you found nothing wrong with the original comment? "Hey guys, check out my book! " "That's the worst 9.2 I've ever seen. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comix4fun Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 It may be me. But that is one of the worse 9.2 I've ever seen Why the facepalm? The 9.2 doesn't even look like an 8.0. (and that's assuming that all of the fingerprinting is on the slab). It wasn't for the grade it was for the utter and complete lack of tact towards someone just enjoying a book that the love and enjoy. Understood. Completely. But this is a free and open exchange. Clearly CGC is soft on this book (and particularly, with its "self-endorsed" signature copies). Any posting outside of a sales thread is an open invitation for comment. And btw, tact is not necessarily a strong suit with internet posters. But this is a "fan" thread...."love" is right there in the title. It's not a "Please brutally critique my O'Barr Crow book" thread...it's a "O'Barr The Crow Love" thread. So it's not that they are a commodity as much as something admired and enjoyed beyond the base measuring sticks normally used. It's not an invitation to be a bellend to people. It's a mutually appreciation thread. People that can't understand the spirit of the thread, or post directly in opposition to the thread's intent, have me scratching my head as to what they are hoping to accomplish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarveySwick Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 I don't know why I even try to explain - I should just shut up and let Chris say it better than I ever could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfingh Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 That book is a lot like the Platinum Sandman 50 or Death issues, where there are spine tics, but the combo of the paper and ink makes them look horrific when really they are just there. It is the way the light reflections play on the scanner. Some of the Platinum Deaths look like 5.0s in the scans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 That book is a lot like the Platinum Sandman 50 or Death issues, where there are spine tics, but the combo of the paper and ink makes them look horrific when really they are just there. It is the way the light reflections play on the scanner. Some of the Platinum Deaths look like 5.0s in the scans. I hold the book in my hand and it's an obvious 9.2. I had it as a 9.0/9.2 before sending it in. I look at the scan and it looks like a 7.5. Incidentally, I <3 The Crow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfingh Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeSang Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Really I wasn't taking a dump on anyone's book. I call it as I see it. Can anyone looking at the scanned book would honestly call it a 9.2 with 6 obvious color breaking spine ticks? It's a comment aimed at CGC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted May 6, 2014 Author Share Posted May 6, 2014 Incidentally, I <3 The Crow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comix4fun Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Really I wasn't taking a dump on anyone's book. I call it as I see it. Can anyone looking at the scanned book would honestly call it a 9.2 with 6 obvious color breaking spine ticks? It's a comment aimed at CGC Perhaps a tersely worded email directly to CGC would have worked better than peeing in the owner's Cheerios like that. Honestly, it came off as less a critique of CGC as it did this: The guy was happy about his book. Nothing wrong with that. Plenty of chances on this board to "call it as you see it", this is one I would have bypassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mschmidt Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 That book is a lot like the Platinum Sandman 50 or Death issues, where there are spine tics, but the combo of the paper and ink makes them look horrific when really they are just there. It is the way the light reflections play on the scanner. Some of the Platinum Deaths look like 5.0s in the scans. Yep, this is a book where you really can't trust the scans to accurately show the condition of the book - I've subbed a ton of Crow books in general and CGC doesn't treat them any differently than any other book from that era. Now ... Primer #2s - that's a different matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Worst. Debbie Downer Meme. EVER. I give it a 9.2. But only a scanned 9.2, not an in-hand 9.2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallMeSang Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 If Ryan graded the book, then yes, the comment would be directed at him. In this case, it's a comment to spur a discussion about what I see. Agree or Disagree - make your case and move on. Noticed I comment on the grade of the book by the scan and not about Ryan's choice of book. If it is indeed the scan that is making it look worse than it is I accept the explanation. God knows I have some of the fugliest books in my collection, and like Ryan, I am proud of it. BTW Ryan, I was seriously considering buying your crow # 2, since I have a 1 and 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted May 6, 2014 Author Share Posted May 6, 2014 And back to a good discussion about a great Copper series. January 2014 interview with the actor now locked in to do the reboot after a few interesting changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakman29 Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 Man Nick seeing that 9.2 makes me think about re-subbing my 9.2.My spine is near perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
