PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[Logan510]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

 

How do you KNOW that??? Look at the history and tell me there was no intent to deceive and it was just a "stupid mistake".

 

The bleeding hearts are out in force today

[N/A]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

She? Who knew.

[erazer]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

Can someone be this screwed up with no intent?

 

I am only referring to the present incident and not his past. I think this incident was a mistake, i.e. "He didn't know any better". Again, this doesn't mean there aren't consequences, but there is a possible justification.

[Logan510]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

Cool books (thumbs u

[Logan510]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

She? Who knew.

 

Certainly not my wife

[Columbia Comics]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

Cool books (thumbs u

 

Exactly...hide behind your screen with your typical lingo. Can't even bother to find out the whole story, just your little part in your sad, little life.

[erazer]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

 

How do you KNOW that??? Look at the history and tell me there was no intent to deceive and it was just a "stupid mistake".

 

The bleeding hearts are out in force today

 

I'm not a bleeding heart. The guy obviously wants to sell stuff and if he had succeeded in "conning" someone with this picture, the boards would have known about it quickly and we'd be right back where we are now. The risk/reward for an extra few dollars based on PQ would not logically have been enough to attempt this con and lose future sales. Stupidity is an easier explanation than malice.

[N/A]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

Can someone be this screwed up with no intent?

 

I am only referring to the present incident and not his past. I think this incident was a mistake, i.e. "He didn't know any better". Again, this doesn't mean there aren't consequences, but there is a possible justification.

 

Gotcha. I find it hard to ignore the past and to me it seems he keeps trying to deceive.

[HarveySwick]

If you read a lot of the posts back in November, I defended Symbiotic. He'll tell you. I had PM conversations with him because he seemed like a nice enough guy. He wrote me at length several PM's sounding VERY sincere and that he loved this place and didn't care about selling and wanted to be honest and just interact with the community.

 

The selling was a very small bit that wasn't important to him. So I stuck my neck out for him. As did several other members. That was in November.

 

Since then he has repeatedly been caught shilling, backing out of deals, and talking out of the side of his mouth.

 

When he originally changed his name to "Future" the first time, I was the one that advised him that if he was really sincere about coming clean - he should leave his name Symbiotic. It wouldn't matter anyway because this community is great at tracking these shysters.

 

Anyway, talk about egg on my face when down the road I see what he CONTINUES to do and CONTINUES to say.

 

May no mistake - he's NOT sorry. He does NOT care about this community. He is here for one thing and one thing only....

 

$

 

As long as people keep falling for his BS excuses and , he'll continue on here.

[Logan510]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

 

How do you KNOW that??? Look at the history and tell me there was no intent to deceive and it was just a "stupid mistake".

 

The bleeding hearts are out in force today

 

I'm not a bleeding heart. The guy obviously wants to sell stuff and if he had succeeded in "conning" someone with this picture, the boards would have known about it quickly and we'd be right back where we are now. The risk/reward for an extra few dollars based on PQ would not logically have been enough to attempt this con and lose future sales. Stupidity is an easier explanation than malice.

 

After everything he's done, I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and not just call him stupid.

[N/A]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

She? Who knew.

 

Certainly not my wife

 

Where were you hiding at Heroes?

[comix4fun]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

And that is what I meant, but Logan knows best. He probably has some faculty which allows him to judge people instead of their actions that I am lacking.

 

 

I think Logan's judging him entirely by his actions.

 

Actions do speak louder than words.

 

In this case, his actions have been deceptive, including shilling behavior which is fraudulent and deceptive behavior that could (and almost did) mislead someone into buying something that isn't at all what was pictured.

 

Once caught, and ONLY when caught, his words were INSTANTLY conciliatory, showing awareness that belies claims of "aww shucks" ignorance.

 

Once is a mistake, three, four, five times and you've got a pattern of behavior that it would be wise to learn from (especially when the words don't match the clear pattern of action).

[Logan510]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

Cool books (thumbs u

 

Exactly...hide behind your screen with your typical lingo. Can't even bother to find out the whole story, just your little part in your sad, little life.

 

Cool comeback (thumbs u

[N/A]

I get all of your points. I'm not saying that he did the right thing. I am only saying I don't think there was malice or intent to deceive. I also agree that he is a screwup that probably deserves to be on the HoS. There are consequences for screwing up, regardless of intent.

 

 

How do you KNOW that??? Look at the history and tell me there was no intent to deceive and it was just a "stupid mistake".

 

The bleeding hearts are out in force today

 

I'm not a bleeding heart. The guy obviously wants to sell stuff and if he had succeeded in "conning" someone with this picture, the boards would have known about it quickly and we'd be right back where we are now. The risk/reward for an extra few dollars based on PQ would not logically have been enough to attempt this con and lose future sales. Stupidity is an easier explanation than malice.

 

After everything he's done, I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and not just call him stupid.

 

 

I remain undecided.

[vaillant]

I think Logan's judging him entire by his actions.

 

Actions do speak louder than words.

 

In this case, his actions have been deceptive, including shilling behavior which is fraudulent and deceptive behavior that could (and almost did) mislead someone into buying something that isn't at all what was pictured.

 

Once caught, and ONLY when caught, his words were INSTANTLY conciliatory, showing awareness that belies claims of "aww shucks" ignorance.

 

Once is a mistake, three, four, five times and you've got a pattern of behavior that it would be wise to learn from (especially when the words don't match the clear pattern of action).

 

I understand perfectly the point, Chris – it’s the attitude.

[Logan510]

How can anyone read the list of asshatery this guy has committed that Harvey laid out for everyone to see...and find ANY way to defend or justify this clown?

 

As usual, you have not even read my post paying attention to what I said.

If you feel like you can insult another person, whatever the reason, I have more reasons to defend a burglar (just an example) than I would have to defend you anyway.

 

Per the usual, Logan has decided to spew negativity across the boards. He's quite the piece of work.

 

Had he taken the time to look at what you posted, he would see that my interaction with Drew occurred on 8/1/2012, which is basically two years ago. His misbehavior had not occurred at that time. So yes, we had a good transaction.

 

I've come to expect nothing less from Logan...and the other trolls she associates with.

 

She? Who knew.

 

Certainly not my wife

 

Where were you hiding at Heroes?

 

Digging through Donald's long boxes of course

 

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

Maybe I missed something, but I'll play devil's advocate on this most recent infraction:

 

He used an eBay picture as a "stock photo" because he had no scans available. Being primarily a modern collector, he:

 

- paid attention only to the number and not the PQ when selecting an image (when does PQ ever come up with moderns?).

 

- did not think a "stock photo" would be a problem. With moderns, you're typically dealing with 9.8s and the general feeling is that a 9.8 is a 9.8. What's the difference if it's the same exact copy or not? Plenty of sellers sell multiple copies of the same 9.8 modern using the same scan.

 

- did not realize that when dealing with non-modern books, people tend to "buy the book, not the grade". An actual image when dealing with an older book, especially one that is not a 9.8, is important to most.

 

I have nothing to say about his previous infractions, but I believe this one was just sloppiness or ignorance and that there was no intent to deceive. I think if this were a modern in 9.8 and if this was someone else, we wouldn't have an issue.

 

 

Had he said "My book isn't this one, but it's the same grade" that would make sense.

 

However, he was selling a slab. Slabs have their own serial number. White page (bronze and earlier) slabs sell at a premium. To Slab buyers the wrap matters, the visible defects matter, the date of certification (research-able through the serial number) could even matter.

 

He simply listed the book, as if it was his, when he knew it wasn't and without disclosure of any kind.

 

I agree if it was a raw modern that it wouldn't be a problem. It's a problem because it's a slab and a $400 one. Any slab sale that uses a stolen scan is going to be a problem whether it's a modern or and oldie.

 

Please also note that he was mentioning the book had not been pressed and would press higher - how would a potential buyer determine that off a stock photo

[comix4fun]

I think Logan's judging him entire by his actions.

 

Actions do speak louder than words.

 

In this case, his actions have been deceptive, including shilling behavior which is fraudulent and deceptive behavior that could (and almost did) mislead someone into buying something that isn't at all what was pictured.

 

Once caught, and ONLY when caught, his words were INSTANTLY conciliatory, showing awareness that belies claims of "aww shucks" ignorance.

 

Once is a mistake, three, four, five times and you've got a pattern of behavior that it would be wise to learn from (especially when the words don't match the clear pattern of action).

 

I understand perfectly the point, Chris – it’s the attitude.

 

 

Ah ok. When you said Logan was judging Symbi outside of his actions I misunderstood you.

[Logan510]

I think Logan's judging him entire by his actions.

 

Actions do speak louder than words.

 

In this case, his actions have been deceptive, including shilling behavior which is fraudulent and deceptive behavior that could (and almost did) mislead someone into buying something that isn't at all what was pictured.

 

Once caught, and ONLY when caught, his words were INSTANTLY conciliatory, showing awareness that belies claims of "aww shucks" ignorance.

 

Once is a mistake, three, four, five times and you've got a pattern of behavior that it would be wise to learn from (especially when the words don't match the clear pattern of action).

 

I understand perfectly the point, Chris – it’s the attitude.

 

 

What's my attitude? That I'm flabbergasted that anyone would step up to the plate for that clown?

 

Guilty as charged

[jsilverjanet]

Maybe I missed something, but I'll play devil's advocate on this most recent infraction:

 

He used an eBay picture as a "stock photo" because he had no scans available. Being primarily a modern collector, he:

 

- paid attention only to the number and not the PQ when selecting an image (when does PQ ever come up with moderns?).

 

- did not think a "stock photo" would be a problem. With moderns, you're typically dealing with 9.8s and the general feeling is that a 9.8 is a 9.8. What's the difference if it's the same exact copy or not? Plenty of sellers sell multiple copies of the same 9.8 modern using the same scan.

 

- did not realize that when dealing with non-modern books, people tend to "buy the book, not the grade". An actual image when dealing with an older book, especially one that is not a 9.8, is important to most.

 

I have nothing to say about his previous infractions, but I believe this one was just sloppiness or ignorance and that there was no intent to deceive. I think if this were a modern in 9.8 and if this was someone else, we wouldn't have an issue.

 

 

Had he said "My book isn't this one, but it's the same grade" that would make sense.

 

However, he was selling a slab. Slabs have their own serial number. White page (bronze and earlier) slabs sell at a premium. To Slab buyers the wrap matters, the visible defects matter, the date of certification (research-able through the serial number) could even matter.

 

He simply listed the book, as if it was his, when he knew it wasn't and without disclosure of any kind.

 

I agree if it was a raw modern that it wouldn't be a problem. It's a problem because it's a slab and a $400 one. Any slab sale that uses a stolen scan is going to be a problem whether it's a modern or and oldie.

 

He also mentioned in his sales thread that he thought the book had a "chance for an upgrade"... inferring that a press could get a higher grade.

 

Which means the potential buyer would then look at the scan to see if he agreed that the defects were pressable...

 

except the scan the buyer would be looking was not the actual book being sold.

 

just read this - +1