PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[crassus]

Somebody voted no?

 

In my time here HoS nominations have rarely been without debate and dissent. Some might feel that since the transaction did result in a full refund that the larger context is not relevant here. That would not be my point of view, but most if not all HoS cases begin with an incomplete transaction.

[newshane]

So is the poll even valid at this point? Didn't we have another situation where we had to do the poll a number of times?

 

I think so too, but I cannot remember exactly. It is customary also isn't it to post a notice of the poll with a link in CG?

 

The poll has been linked from within a thread in CG.

 

That could get lost in the thread no? And newcomers to the topic might miss it.

 

Okay. I just posted a new thread in CG.

[oakman29]

Yes, burn the witch.

[crassus]

One other thing to brace yourself for is the debate as to whether the offender is bad enough to deserve the HoS. Some have a very high threshold for what is HoS worthy.

[newshane]

One other thing to brace yourself for is the debate as to whether the offender is bad enough to deserve the HoS. Some have a very high threshold for what is HoS worthy.

 

I am fine with whatever the board decides to do as a community. It is my hope they would choose to protect themselves and those around them from falling prey to the fraudulent scheme.

 

You are correct about the technicality involved since I did get a complete refund.

 

My nomination is designed to allow people to make their own informed decision.

 

In the end, it is my hope that his other customers are made whole again.

 

 

[crassus]

One other thing to brace yourself for is the debate as to whether the offender is bad enough to deserve the HoS. Some have a very high threshold for what is HoS worthy.

 

I am fine with whatever the board decides to do as a community. It is my hope they would choose to protect themselves and those around them from falling prey to the fraudulent scheme.

 

You are correct about the technicality involved since I did get a complete refund.

 

My nomination is designed to allow people to make their own informed decision.

 

In the end, it is my hope that his other customers are made whole again.

 

 

Do you know if any other Boardies did business with him?

[newshane]

One other thing to brace yourself for is the debate as to whether the offender is bad enough to deserve the HoS. Some have a very high threshold for what is HoS worthy.

 

I am fine with whatever the board decides to do as a community. It is my hope they would choose to protect themselves and those around them from falling prey to the fraudulent scheme.

 

You are correct about the technicality involved since I did get a complete refund.

 

My nomination is designed to allow people to make their own informed decision.

 

In the end, it is my hope that his other customers are made whole again.

 

 

Do you know if any other Boardies did business with him?

 

Unfortunately, there is no way for me to determine how to contact his other eBay victims. I can see which items were sold and for how much, but everyone's ID is partially blocked/scrambled for privacy.

 

I wish I knew how to contact them. They deserve their refunds as much as I did.

 

His ID is about 2 years old, and his post count is only 7. Doesn't look like a shill account because it's so similar to his eBay ID. I don't know if anyone has done business with him or not.

[oakman29]

He's already made my " never to buy from " list.

[Hado]

Since the thread was scrubbed, and while his statements are inflammatory, does anyone have the whole coversation saved?

 

I'm not saying he didn't say those things, but we should see what he was responding to.

 

Otherwise it's like hearing one side of a phone conversation, the person on the other end could be saying anything to get those results.

[DR.X]

The comic shop blame was probably a deflection from his own scam. I've been collecting for 45 years and dealt with lots of shops. Never seen a shop with a stock of multiple covers.

[crassus]

Since the thread was scrubbed, and while his statements are inflammatory, does anyone have the whole coversation saved?

 

I'm not saying he didn't say those things, but we should see what he was responding to.

 

Otherwise it's like hearing one side of a phone conversation, the person on the other end could be saying anything to get those results.

 

Yes it was unfortunate as the whole conversation is really necessary. Can one save a whole thread or must it always be post by post?

[MetalPSI]

The comic shop blame was probably a deflection from his own scam. I've been collecting for 45 years and dealt with lots of shops. Never seen a shop with a stock of multiple covers.

 

100% agreed. I think he was a lone scammer.

[shadroch]

I voted no because I don't think the CGC board should act as the policeman of the comic world.

That's my stance. The one board member affected has received his money back and retains ownership of the book.

I'm quite certain my view will be the minority . So be it.

[shadroch]

Is this guy in the league of Hammer aka Comic Keys?

 

[PovertyRow]

I voted No as well. At this point we have one boardie who was impacted and who got a refund.

 

As regards the timing of this, we went from 8:10PM for an announcement of the intent to have an HOS nomination to a write up and a poll for that HOS nomination 8 minutes later. That is just not how HOS and even PL is done. This process has been in place for years now. The last time I updated the rule list and re-posted it was 7/21/2011.

 

Please review the rules here:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4949997#Post4949997

 

Personally, I don't see this as an HOS offense since we had one member who ended up being reimbursed and, if I understand right, also got to keep the book? Is that correct?

 

I agree with Shad. It is not our place to police the comic book world. It is also not our place to act as enforcers for eBay, Amazon or any other venues outside of these boards. Our place is to focus on transactions made between our members.

 

If a situation occurs, like this one, off the boards on a venue like eBay, we look at as regards to the specific board members involved. In this case one so far, who was reimbursed. For the rest of it, we should be letting the venue such as eBay handle any further disciplinary actions.

 

[CAHokie]

Does that type of thinking (and I am not saying you are wrong), kind of imply "Hey, if you get caught running straight up scams, just refund the guy that figures it out and you are good to go" type mentality?

[MetalPSI]

I think some people think we have more influence than what we do. This is a small portion of the world of comic collecting.

 

Hell for most people it's not even a blip.

 

This guy, if a true scammer, will just change his username and it will be business as usual. If not, then he's learned his lesson about being so naive when it comes to this type of thing (double covers being an exceptional breakage of the rules, especially in moderns)

 

CGC is not the be all, end all. Hell, if this place survives another year, I'd be surprised. People are a fickle lot.

[PovertyRow]

Does that type of thinking (and I am not saying you are wrong), kind of imply "Hey, if you get caught running straight up scams, just refund the guy that figures it out and you are good to go" type mentality?

 

A refund works fine for the PL and we have had people on the PL with situations that impacted more than one boardie who got off the PL after reimbursement.

 

I have long said and continue to believe we are here under the auspices of a corporate entity: Collectors Society/CGC. As such we need to be careful overreaching into other venues such as eBay, Amazon etc that are NOT part of Collectors Society. We should only be tending to member situations when it comes to these off-board venues. And in that respect this is more a PL nomination that has been reimbursed.

[thehumantorch]

The comic shop blame was probably a deflection from his own scam. I've been collecting for 45 years and dealt with lots of shops. Never seen a shop with a stock of multiple covers.

 

His story changed from getting the books at a comic shop to getting them from a friend. He had to change the story because people were asking which comic store he got the books from.

 

That flat out makes him a liar and strongly supports the idea that he's dishonest and manufacturing these books himself.

 

Burn the witch

[miraclemet]

I can see the perspective of not wanting to over-reach the boards "authority" since this was an ebay transaction though it did involve two boardies (granted the "offender" is not an oft used account)

 

I can also see the perspective of of wanting to HOS a board memeber who manufactured and sold comic books with an explicit intent to defraud the buyer, even if that transaction occurred elsewhere.

 

BUT, and here's the big one. We don't KNOW he was creating the books or that he was aware of their fake-ness when he sold them (he is careful even when he admits that the friend was manufacturing them that the seller says he didnt know they were fake at the time of sale).

 

So since we dont know, it's hard to be definitive in judgement... and if there's a reasonable doubt, then i guess you have to go no on the HOS.

 

Im glad the OP got his money back in full.