PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[VintageComics]

 

Every punishment? HoS is punitive, for one.

 

I'll be honest, I don't know. Does that mean that someone can't ever be removed from the HOS?

 

If so, that would make the decision even more difficult for me personally.

[crassus]

 

Every punishment? HoS is punitive, for one.

 

I'll be honest, I don't know. Does that mean that someone can't ever be removed from the HOS?

 

If so, that would make the decision even more difficult for me personally.

 

One can get off the HoS. A community vote puts a person on, a community vote to reverse can take a person off the HoS. And that has happened here within my time, just cannot remember the Boardie's name..was it Menace?

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

A while back (a few months ago) didn't he sell a run of really nice WHIZ books for you on ebay? You announced it here on the Boards prior to sale if I remember.

I don't have normally many big dollars to spend on comic books, but at that time I had saved up a few hundred dollars. I actually bid quite large amounts on two of the lots but was outbid, and disappointed.

After reading all this since, this bread and butter collector (me) is glad he now didn't win.

 

Yes, those were my books.

 

For what it's worth, before putting those books up for auction I offered to back any sale of those books through Chip with my own money and reputation.

 

I was basically trying to think out aloud as to who this guy was. It's obvious you believe in giving him second (third & fourth) chances etc.

With the greatest respect I think you have a conflict of interest where this character is concerned.

Making excuses for him is actually enabling him to do more harm in the future.

You wouldn't try and help an alcoholic by giving him a bottle of JD and hoping he pack in drinking next week. A simplistic analogy maybe, but you know the point.

This guy appears to play every card in the pack he can to garner support from whoever he can.

Sometimes you have to say 'enough is enough'...and walk away.

[joeypost]

Would you agree that whether premeditated or not, both are punishable? People are either out goods, money or both. And in many instances the feeling of goodwill towards a down and out member of this community were not reciprocated with trust. I wonder if you were a Judge if you would ever throw anyone in jail. Or would you feel different if it were done to you.

 

You're assuming it has never been done to me. After nearly 14 years of collecting comics since getting back into it and now being a full time dealer, I've lost money to people and I weigh the way I feel about it based on my perception of circumstances.

 

I've lost money to people who I believe were thieves and I've done everything within my power to make sure they were punished including contacting local authorities.

 

But I've also lost money to people who I believe were either poor at managing themselves or ran onto some bad luck.

 

For example, there's a board member who owes me $500 since the mortgage crisis hit in 2008. He was in the job of selling mortgages. He lost his home, his marriage broke down and he's now rebuilding. I know he'll get it to me when the time is right. I'd forgotten about it until now.

 

Punishable? I've already stated multiple times that both are punishable. I do agree that there needs to be consequences to correct bad behavior and to protect people from that behavior. They are just not punishable in the same way IMO.

 

If I'm a judge I weight all the facts before me including past, recent and present behavior.

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

We have a bunch of judges in this thread and many don't believe it's a factor and that is where we disagree.

 

So yes, there needs to be consequences (punishment) but consequences need to fit the crime.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say not to put Chip on the HOS. People need to be aware. I'm just stating the reasons why I think this has all happened and I don't personally believe that there is predetermined malice.

 

The example you use is a one on one transaction. Had you decided to make it public (if it happened here on the boards) action would have been taken by the community. You CHOSE to keep it quiet, and in this case with Chip, others chose to speak out. While unfortunate, it does show a repeated and prolonged pattern on Chips part. With that said, I am interested to see what the vote has to say, because that will be a reflection of what the community here on the boards is thinking.

 

And in case you are wondering I have dealt with many cases of mental illness and in all of them, at no time, were actions that ran contrary to acceptable behavior acceptable.

[HarveySwick]

 

Every punishment? HoS is punitive, for one.

 

I'll be honest, I don't know. Does that mean that someone can't ever be removed from the HOS?

 

If so, that would make the decision even more difficult for me personally.

 

One can get off the HoS. A community vote puts a person on, a community vote to reverse can take a person off the HoS. And that has happened here within my time, just cannot remember the Boardie's name..was it Menace?

 

Menace

[VintageComics]

I was basically trying to think out aloud as to who this guy was. It's obvious you believe in giving him second (third & fourth) chances etc.

With the greatest respect I think you have a conflict of interest where this character is concerned.

Making excuses for him is actually enabling him to do more harm in the future.

You wouldn't try and help an alcoholic by giving him a bottle of JD and hoping he pack in drinking next week. A simplistic analogy maybe, but you know the point.

This guy appears to play every card in the pack he can to garner support from whoever he can.

Sometimes you have to say 'enough is enough'...and walk away.

 

Nobody is making excuses or giving an alcoholic the bottle.

 

You can discuss the punishment and also have a separate discussion about cause.

 

Or maybe not.

[HarveySwick]

this is what this whole Chip story reminds me of...

 

 

This guy might as well start a GoFundMe page. It's the same thing Chip did. Do you think he's a thief?

 

The difference between the two is that Chip used photos of his daughter instead of a wheelchair.

 

Roy,

 

Maybe you didn't see this post. Maybe you're not responding to me. I don't want to harass or intimidate you, but do you think what Chip did is any different than what this guy did?

[comix4fun]

 

Not calling you specifically out, but comic selling and shipping aside how do you justify the 15K fiasco? If not for that, I completely understand what Red typed earlier. It's everything as a whole, but dang....People were donating their personal items and money that could be spent on their own families to help someone who planned on using the vast majority of the money to pay off a loan, then sit around and buy more comics. Basically repeating the very actions that got him in a hole to begin with.

 

From your point of view and from mine, there is no justification for it.

 

As i understand it though, Chip didn't lie about what the money was going towards did he? When asked he explained his thought process, whether people agreed with it or not.

 

 

I just wanted to answer this part, since I didn't see anyone else do so....

 

His reasoning for why he needed the $15k changed at least three times.

 

First, he needed the $15k to stave off eviction and loss of everything he owned.

 

From his GoFundMe page entitled "Chip's Recovery"

 

...I will not be able to catch up quickly enough to save my home and my car. Once I lose those, I'm sunk. Every bill I have is at least two months behind and on the 1st all the major ones are due again. All monetary accounts are in the negative and internet/phone are in danger of being shut off this week. Anything I had that was worth selling has been sold or pawned...only a few pieces of furniture and the computer I'm using to write this remain.

 

 

What this doesn't say is that the actual plan was (even as he was writing the GoFundMe language), as he told more than one board member, to use $3,000 to get current on rent and then use the rest to pay off a PayPal loan...TO ALLOW HIMSELF TO TAKE OUT ANOTHER LARGER LOAN.

 

That met with the type of incredulous condemnation you might expect.

 

That's when the third version he came up with of why $15k was needed came out: $3k to get current and the rest was to pay all of his bills for several months while he tries to figure out what to do, where to move, etc.

 

Yes, that's right. Out of the three versions listed above he thought that turning to us to for a pseudo-CGC FORUM SCHOLARSHIP FUND was the least detestable version of the truth. But it wasn't volunteered, it wasn't on his GoFundMe page, it wasn't given freely and before there was outcry. Much like Chip's business practices, his confession in the GoFundMeFiasco came only AFTER people held his feet to the fire.

 

Honesty isn't a switch that turned on or off and it's not genuine or a signal of personal integrity when the truth is only shown after coercion is applied.

 

This forum has come together over and over during the 15-some years I've been here to help out people in times of tragedies and accidents. Perhaps our efforts were a bit too open and generous and public because, just like in other real world tragedies, there always seems to be someone willing to prey upon the generosity of others.

 

If people are considering how to vote then perhaps the totality of the facts, and not just if everyone got their books this time after Chip being forced to do so, which includes that GoFundMe travesty.

 

[HarveySwick]

Don't harass Roy!

[comix4fun]

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

 

No, they don't. Proof of mental illness? Yes. Possibility of mental illness, to be used as mitigation as if it were fact instead of assertion without confirmation or corroboration? No.

[comix4fun]

Don't harass Roy!

 

 

I'd never harass Roy. I just wanted to summarize the GoFundMe issue and the ever changing reason for and potential use of the money since there may have been some confusion there.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Don't harass Roy!

 

 

I'd never harass Roy. I just wanted to summarize the GoFundMe issue and the ever changing reason for and potential use of the money since there may have been some confusion there.

 

 

Swick was just being sarcastic because we had a bit of a back and forth about it before.

[VintageComics]

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

 

No, they don't. Proof of mental illness? Yes. Possibility of mental illness, to be used as mitigation as if it were fact instead of assertion without confirmation or corroboration? No.

 

You know what I mean.

 

If there was reason to believe there was mental illness it would be investigated and if proof was found it would be weighed in the punishment.

[comix4fun]

I vote No for HOS. I think Chip is a very bad seller who takes way too long to ship and when he gets behind doesn't follow through unless threatened with consequences. He can be manipulative and I wouldn't personally deal with him without safeguards in place such as him shipping before payment. However, I don't think he is a thief and that is my criteria for a HOS vote.

 

A thief would cut and run. A thief would not ship out books during a losing HOS vote.

 

 

 

I can see that reasoning as being logical and you've got every right to vote how you choose, of course.

 

However, are you only looking at the board transactions and not the totality of his interaction on these boards as it pertains to transactions and requested donations through his GoFundMe?

 

If we laser focus on just transactions then I may agree. Once Chip is threatened enough he, eventually, comes through. If we're talking about EVERYTHING, including the GoFundMe with the changing reasons for the money and what he attempted to do there I think we might get into who the man under the screen name really is.

 

And really, someone as manipulative as he is, from what I've seen and read over the 22+ years of internet history he has (including everything here), would keep shipping out books during a losing HOS vote just so someone might take notice of it and say so....the couple hundred bucks of low end stuff he owes people is a solid investment if he can plant the "he's just difficult" seed in place of the "thief and liar" seed.

[Columbia Comics]

Don't harass Roy!

I'd never harass Roy.

 

I would ?

[comix4fun]

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

 

No, they don't. Proof of mental illness? Yes. Possibility of mental illness, to be used as mitigation as if it were fact instead of assertion without confirmation or corroboration? No.

 

You know what I mean.

 

If there was reason to believe there was mental illness it would be investigated and if proof was found it would be weighed in the punishment.

 

 

Right, and what they wouldn't do is take the word of the defendant and only the word of the defendant that it exists.

[VintageComics]

 

What this doesn't say is that the actual plan was (even as he was writing the GoFundMe language), as he told more than one board member, to use $3,000 to get current on rent and then use the rest to pay off a PayPal loan...TO ALLOW HIMSELF TO TAKE OUT ANOTHER LARGER LOAN.

 

That met with the type of incredulous condemnation you might expect.

 

That's when the third version he came up with of why $15k was needed came out: $3k to get current and the rest was to pay all of his bills for several months while he tries to figure out what to do, where to move, etc.

 

I see versions 2 and 3 as the same thing. I believe he was going to get another loan in order to give him time to sort himself out.

 

When I was down and out, I did pretty much the same thing.

 

I was living off a line of credit that was maxed. I'd make the minimum payment and live off of what was available from it until the next payment came along.

 

The difference between Chip and I was that I had a solid career as an automechanic which helped me to stave off bankruptcy for longer.

 

I don't know what job options are like in Myrtle Beach but I didn't have that problem.

 

I ended up getting into comics to make ends meet.

 

Honesty isn't a switch that turned on or off and it's not genuine or a signal of personal integrity when the truth is only shown after coercion is applied.

 

I'd be willing to bet that most people's honesty is directly related to how they see their chances of survival.

 

If people are considering how to vote then perhaps the totality of the facts, and not just if everyone got their books this time after Chip being forced to do so, which includes that GoFundMe travesty.

 

So far the only thing we differ on is whether mental illness is involved or not.

 

Again, HOS nomination seems to be the way to go.

 

I just disagree on the reason why.

[VintageComics]

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

 

No, they don't. Proof of mental illness? Yes. Possibility of mental illness, to be used as mitigation as if it were fact instead of assertion without confirmation or corroboration? No.

 

You know what I mean.

 

If there was reason to believe there was mental illness it would be investigated and if proof was found it would be weighed in the punishment.

 

 

Right, and what they wouldn't do is take the word of the defendant and only the word of the defendant that it exists.

 

I don't disagree with any of this.

 

We still don't conclusively know whether there is or isn't mental illness involved. But I am siding with it being very possible.

 

And since none of us can offer any proof except for Chip (although we do know he was checked into a hospital and he has told me that he is on regular treatment including medication and counseling) everyone has to make a decision based on how they feel.

 

And I need to add that nobody should be ostracized for the decisions they choose to make as long it's reasonable.

[comix4fun]

 

If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration?

 

 

No, they don't. Proof of mental illness? Yes. Possibility of mental illness, to be used as mitigation as if it were fact instead of assertion without confirmation or corroboration? No.

 

You know what I mean.

 

If there was reason to believe there was mental illness it would be investigated and if proof was found it would be weighed in the punishment.

 

 

Right, and what they wouldn't do is take the word of the defendant and only the word of the defendant that it exists.

 

I don't disagree with any of this.

 

We still don't conclusively know whether there is or isn't mental illness involved. But I am siding with it being very possible.

 

And since none of us can offer any proof except for Chip (although we do know he was checked into a hospital and he has told me that he is on regular treatment including medication and counseling) everyone has to make a decision based on how they feel.

 

And I need to add that nobody should be ostracized for the decisions they choose to make as long it's reasonable.

 

 

The hospital thing was because Swick called the cops when Chip posted in a thread about hurting himself.

 

I wouldn't necessarily equate being in a hospital for a few hours, given that it was pure procedure on the part of the authorities, with any diagnosis one way or the other.

 

Also, I struck through what he told you...objection...hearsay.

[VintageComics]

Sigh....We may as well start making the argument that he is unable to distinguish between right and wrong.

 

You do realize that this is a very distinct possibility and is at the root of what mental health is?

 

'Right and wrong' is wide reaching.

 

How about the fact that some people can be self-convinced in the moment that they are doing the best that they can do when they can actually do better?

 

"Grow up and pull yourself up by your bootstraps" doesn't always work for people. Some sink even more.