PROBATION DISCUSSIONS 21 21

[DrWatson]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Looks a little bit like democracy

Yeah, if it's one thing this message board is all about, it's democracy.

[PovertyRow]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Technically it is not because technically (governmentally speaking now), technically this is a Moderator issue and technically, not a PL issue. An HOS issue but not a PL issue.

[VintageComics]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Technically it is not because technically (governmentally speaking now), technically this is a Moderator issue and technically, not a PL issue. An HOS issue but not a PL issue.

 

the technical rules! Burn the witch! Makes for a really good fire!!!

[Mr.Diggler]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

I agree. Also everyone else that ever sold a PGX book since the rules were instituted needs to be hunted down and thrown on the list too.

 

[joeypost]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Technically it is not because technically (governmentally speaking now), technically this is a Moderator issue and technically, not a PL issue. An HOS issue but not a PL issue.

 

Would Trey being in the HOS send the same message to any new members or buyers to the boards? At this point it is all Semantics to me but if you feel strongly I have to respect your point of view. If a lesson is learned, that is what is most important.

[DrWatson]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Technically it is not because technically (governmentally speaking now), technically this is a Moderator issue and technically, not a PL issue. An HOS issue but not a PL issue.

You're squirrel bait.

[N/A]

Probation List or Hall of Shame, what difference does it make? Check whatever box makes you feel good and move on. My God, it's like talking to a government worker.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

If violating rule #1 is PL worthy, which one of you man-babies is going to nominate Chuck Gower for trying to peddle a sweet Florida Panthers Vanbiesbrouck jersey in the mixed forum?

 

 

I will. He's been getting uppity lately.

 

Plus, he didn't buy enough of my variants.

 

[bababooey]

If violating rule #1 is PL worthy, which one of you man-babies is going to nominate Chuck Gower for trying to peddle a sweet Florida Panthers Vanbiesbrouck jersey in the mixed forum?

 

 

I will. He's been getting uppity lately.

 

Plus, he didn't buy enough of my variants.

 

Maybe he just doesn't like speculating on moderns like you do.

[FIREFLY]

My suggestion is ban me from buying anything from you and I'll do the same

 

In one way, it's unfortunate that this issue came about the way it did. This seems to have been resolved in the beginning via PM in regards to the actual transaction and not all the PL or HOS dilemma. The issue seems familiar in that an issue was introduced that opened up a can of worms regarding a secondary topic, but we have yet to hear from Trey as to any input he may have on the continuing conversation. Maybe he sees as being resolved?

 

Personally I think you knew it was in a PGX slab and that the only reason you bought the book was to create drama and try to start trouble

 

I highly doubt that this was Joey's intent, but If Roy is correct on Trey's background, then the reasoning may be somewhat off when acting on feelings and emotions. If there is an autistic component involved, depending where on the spectrum he may lie, then understanding the "social" component of rules and guidelines may be difficult. I don't know Trey, so I can't make such a judgement. People with developmental disabilities, or mental disabilities for that matter, understand and comprehend things differently. People can function at different levels.

 

 

I am going to keep it.

I think this is the resolution to this issue. Case closed. Am I correct? Joey seems willing to be over and done with it. But on the end of selling PGX slabs, this seems like a mod issue. Whether or not Trey gets on the list or not, this whole discussion has shown people more than enough in that they could make their own decision as to whether or not to deal with him in the future. I think an apology for how it all transpired should be in order. For those that know Trey personally, an effort could be made to help and teach him the consequences of his actions in a way that he may understand (assuming that he does have some kind of disability). If he does not have one, then that's another type of conversation to have with him.

[PovertyRow]

 

Would Trey being in the HOS send the same message to any new members or buyers to the boards? At this point it is all Semantics to me but if you feel strongly I have to respect your point of view. If a lesson is learned, that is what is most important.

 

The PL has two main purposes. The first is what I think some feel is its sole purpose: to alert others to a troublesome forum member when it comes to buying or selling.

 

The other purpose is to provide a platform where the problems that can occur in a transaction can be worked out between the buyer and seller. This one seems to get a lot less publicity.

 

You should not have removed the book from the slab and, after doing so, submitted Trey for the PL. Deslabbing and deciding to keep it negated the ability to resolve the problem by returning the book.

 

Trey's posting of the PMs is a moderator issue, not a PL issue. If we started putting people on the PL for acting like jerks or for posting PMs the list would be a lot longer.

 

Personally I would have not have had an issue with this going onto the PL had you played the game straight. You didn't.

 

You did not submit Trey to the PL for selling an undisclosed PGX book. You submitted him because he posted the PMs. In my eye you brewed the pooch on that call, and you used the PL not to solve the problem or to expose the sale but simply for retribution. It is an honorless thing on both sides.

 

[PovertyRow]

Your turn for another compelling argument, Watson. Let's see: "You're a '" is still available. Maybe "Were you hatched in a gutter, Pov?" I don't believe that's been used either. Or feel free to improvise as best you can.

[Aces]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Oh but they are mutually exclusive. The sales forum is a place provided by CGC for buyers and sellers to interact and buy and sell. It has specific rules. The rest of the boards are where we all get to express opinion. It is already a matter of fact that opinions expressed in the sales forum can't cross the line of thread krapping. There is an entirely different etiquette to the sales forum. That etiquette is there to help buyers and sellers. So if there is no issue between buyer and seller the issue must be between the seller and the boards. That, to me treads the line of a popularity contest. Joey is one of the most beloved board members. He is certainly one of my favorite guys around here. Trey, on the other hand, is not so highly regarded. He has brought much of the disdain upon himself with some of his past actions. Let's face it, he's a knucklehead. But in this instance it seems to me there is a ton of piling on for something which, in hindsight, was a fully consummated and satisfactory transaction for both parties.

1. joeypost was willing to let it slide. That's not exactly a satisfactory transaction.

 

2. the PL is not here just to punish folks, or even just to make sure that a specific transaction ends well. Its greatest value is as a warning to others not to deal with the "knuckleheads." Its most definitely a tool for the community.

Yep, the PL is like a warning label/sign. Beware of Dog Doucheebag.

 

*Can't believe they cersored person_who_is_obnoxiously_self-impressed*

[Aces]

And that 30 day rule has been waived before if the offense was consider severe enough.

 

[buttock]

I think Arch should just give Trey a custom title to the effect of:

 

"This person is mentally handicapped. Deal with him at your own risk."

 

... and leave it at that.

 

Being upset at Trey for violating rules is like getting mad at your new puppy for wizzing on the floor. He isn't capable of understanding that he's doing wrong.

BS. He knows exactly what he's doing. Go to a convention and watch him operate his way through Artist's Alley.

 

I watched him at Muchin's booth once. It was epic!

[Mr.Diggler]

[PovertyRow]

And that 30 day rule has been waived before if the offense was consider severe enough.

 

I believe the 30 day rule has been waived more when it has been made apparent there is not going to be a resolution as opposed to severity of the offense. For example, someone saying "screw you all, I am not going to make this good."

 

Joey's resolution is an apology and admission of being wrong from Trey.

 

Trey - you listening here?

[JazzMan]

This argument is now getting me tired. Just look at all the pixels you guys have killed for this discussion. It's disgusting...this argument is making the occupy demonstrators look organized.

 

And BTW, I agree with Pov's last post and let's be done with this.

[DrWatson]

And that 30 day rule has been waived before if the offense was consider severe enough.

 

I believe the 30 day rule has been waived more when it has been made apparent there is not going to be a resolution as opposed to severity of the offense. For example, someone saying "screw you all, I am not going to make this good."

 

Joey's resolution is an apology and admission of being wrong from Trey.

 

Trey - you listening here?

Trey: "Gee, I'm sorry. I promise not to do it again... at least until I get caught."

[NewEnglandGothic]

The difference is that what we do with the PL has impact on future PL additions. If the door is open to one thing it will be the wedge that gets wider and pushed the door open more.

And what great evil are we opening the door to by adding him the probation list as opposed to the hall of the shame?

 

Well, for one thing, 30 days has apparently not elapsed but according to Joey only 10 days. We are supposed to allow 30 days for the two of them to come to an agreement or for restitution to occur. This leaves 20 days for the two of them to work something out.

 

We let this in we may as well drop the 30 days and just start adding people the day after a problem occurs.

 

My apologies - I just assumed, and since the sales thread had been deleted I had no idea when this took place.

How is the thirty day rule even applicable when his violation is intentionally altering scans so he can sell a product that is expressly forbidden to be sold on the CGC message boards?

 

Technically it is not because technically (governmentally speaking now), technically this is a Moderator issue and technically, not a PL issue. An HOS issue but not a PL issue.

 

the technical rules! Burn the witch! Makes for a really good fire!!!

Technically, the witches were hanged down here in New England, Roy.