How in the world did this go unnoticed???

[gpanalysis]

... chock full of ridonkulous

 

[TupennyConan]

We just need a Comic book organization of some sort that isn't tasked for any one aspect of the hobby/industry.

 

Do other hobbies have some sort of the same thing?

 

Meetings could be held at the major comic conventions...

 

 

This can only work if the guiding principles are a sense of fun, a sense of humor & a sense of celebration of the hobby.

 

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

We just need a Comic book organization of some sort that isn't tasked for any one aspect of the hobby/industry.

 

Do other hobbies have some sort of the same thing?

 

Meetings could be held at the major comic conventions...

 

 

This can only work if the guiding principles are a sense of fun, a sense of humor & a sense of celebration of the hobby.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, that's not what we need.

 

It's certainly what we'd like, but the reality says different.

[sckao]

We just need a Comic book organization of some sort that isn't tasked for any one aspect of the hobby/industry.

 

Do other hobbies have some sort of the same thing?

 

Meetings could be held at the major comic conventions...

 

 

This can only work if the guiding principles are a sense of fun, a sense of humor & a sense of celebration of the hobby.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, that's not what we need.

 

It's certainly what we'd like, but the reality says different.

 

Hey! Maybe Gareb is doing this with his Wizard conventions...

 

 

 

 

J/K

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Wahappen?

 

We seem to be light a few pages? It was all quiet on the western front when I headed to bed, so who started throwing mess around?

[GACollectibles]

Wahappen?

 

We seem to be light a few pages? It was all quiet on the western front when I headed to bed, so who started throwing mess around?

 

Maybe someone felt cgcworld's post was not worth the 5 minute contribution. I missed what happened after I quoted you last night.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Wahappen?

 

We seem to be light a few pages? It was all quiet on the western front when I headed to bed, so who started throwing mess around?

 

Maybe someone felt cgcworld's post was not worth the 5 minute contribution. I missed what happened after I quoted you last night.

 

So all his effort for naught? That's just sad.

[VintageComics]

Might have been a combination of a little masking and some of the same stuff being regurgitated.

 

[Sal]

there wasn't any masking.

 

 

i did learn a new word that will bypass the filter, though.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

I dont know. Nothing interesting was posted before I went to bed..

[Transplant]

Wahappen?

 

We seem to be light a few pages? It was all quiet on the western front when I headed to bed, so who started throwing mess around?

 

Maybe someone felt cgcworld's post was not worth the 5 minute contribution. I missed what happened after I quoted you last night.

 

So all his effort for naught? That's just sad.

Nick, my question to you was deleted last night in the mods usual surgical-precision deletions. You're about to embark on a venture selling comics worldwide. Will you be developing a "do not sell" list for people? If so, what are the criteria? How will you track it? Will it be proactive or will you wait until someone sells later without disclosing resto or pressing,etc.?

 

Because that's what you and JJ are asking Brent to do, be responsible for all the books that he presses once they leave his hands. I believe he has stated that all customers of the pressing service are agreeing to have their books scanned before/after the press, for posterity. Is that not enough? It's enough to conform to the current NOD guidelines for members who provide this service. Should Susan Ciccone quit the NOD since I believe it's been stated she now offers intact pressing by itself? Members can't provide this service without being in an ethical dilemma? Going farther, should she quit providing restoration services if she's a member? By your logic, she's enabling people to possibly sell without disclosure later.

 

I'm generally interested in your and JJ's answers to these questions.

[DrWatson]

I believe he has stated that all customers of the pressing service are agreeing to have their books scanned before/after the press, for posterity.

Is this true? Did Brent come out and say this?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Because that's what you and JJ are asking Brent to do, be responsible for all the books that he presses once they leave his hands.

 

This is precisely the point...Brent cannot be held responsible...it's simply impossible as well as unrealistic & unreasonable.

 

Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?

 

He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool.

 

And please don't try and make the connection between what Brent is doing (pressing books) with what I'm doing (selling books).

 

I will take every step that I am able to minimise the 'problem'.

 

I will not press books.

 

I will not have books pressed.

 

If I am selling a book that I know has been pressed, I will proactively disclose.

 

Actually, there's a 'grade comment' field on the database, used for such things as 'date stamp back cover', 'interior page tear', etc., etc. One of the fields is 'pressed'.

 

I trust that these measures are sufficient?

[Foolkiller]

I don't think Brent is trying to fight having more books pressed, just that he agrees it should be disclosed. He's been pressing for years before this -- so I'm not sure why the fact that he's offering it as an actual service to the public is really that big of a deal.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I don't think Brent is trying to fight having more books pressed, just that he agrees it should be disclosed. He's been pressing for years before this -- so I'm not sure why the fact that he's offering it as an actual service to the public is really that big of a deal.

 

It's not a big deal...in isolation.

 

Neither is it dishonest, unethical or particularly wrong.

 

What it is, IMHO, is a conflict of interest.

[Transplant]

Exactly Brian. I don't see this as any different from him already pressing his own books and selling them with disclosure. There's always the risk that someone later will not disclose.

 

Nick: If you sell a pressed book, you run the risk of it being sold later without disclosure. Aren't you enabling that by doing so? To follow your logic, shouldn't you refuse to purchase or sell pressed books?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Exactly Brian. I don't see this as any different from him already pressing his own books and selling them with disclosure. There's always the risk that someone later will not disclose.

 

Nick: If you sell a pressed book, you run the risk of it being sold later without disclosure. Aren't you enabling that by doing so? To follow your logic, shouldn't you refuse to purchase or sell pressed books?

 

Apples and oranges.

 

A book that has already been pressed, that is already part of the pool and part of the potential problem, goes through my hands.

 

A book that was previously untouched is pressed by Brent and added to the pool, which increases the potential problem.

[qualitycomix]

Because that's what you and JJ are asking Brent to do, be responsible for all the books that he presses once they leave his hands.

 

This is precisely the point...Brent cannot be held responsible...it's simply impossible as well as unrealistic & unreasonable.

 

Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?

 

He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool.

 

And please don't try and make the connection between what Brent is doing (pressing books) with what I'm doing (selling books).

 

I will take every step that I am able to minimise the 'problem'.

 

I will not press books.

 

I will not have books pressed.

 

If I am selling a book that I know has been pressed, I will proactively disclose.

 

Actually, there's a 'grade comment' field on the database, used for such things as 'date stamp back cover', 'interior page tear', etc., etc. One of the fields is 'pressed'.

 

I trust that these measures are sufficient?

 

"He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool."

 

"Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?"

 

-----------------------

Regarding the above statements Nick, I've been personally adding more pressed books to the pool for 7 years. I've also disclosed.

 

I have no problems adding more pressed books to the pool. You do.

 

What I do have a problem with is lack of disclosure not because I care about pressing, but because I respect the opinions of those who do care.

 

Once the books leave my hands, there is no enforcement, either when I sell a books that has been pressed and disclosed, when we press a book for a customer or when you sell a book that has been pressed and disclosed.

 

Pressing books was never the issue. Disclosure is. That is the NOD's official stance on this issue and it always has been. There is no conflict of interest in this matter.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Because that's what you and JJ are asking Brent to do, be responsible for all the books that he presses once they leave his hands.

 

This is precisely the point...Brent cannot be held responsible...it's simply impossible as well as unrealistic & unreasonable.

 

Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?

 

He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool.

 

And please don't try and make the connection between what Brent is doing (pressing books) with what I'm doing (selling books).

 

I will take every step that I am able to minimise the 'problem'.

 

I will not press books.

 

I will not have books pressed.

 

If I am selling a book that I know has been pressed, I will proactively disclose.

 

Actually, there's a 'grade comment' field on the database, used for such things as 'date stamp back cover', 'interior page tear', etc., etc. One of the fields is 'pressed'.

 

I trust that these measures are sufficient?

 

"He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool."

 

"Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?"

 

-----------------------

Regarding the above statements Nick, I've been personally adding more pressed books to the pool for 7 years. I've also disclosed.

 

I have no problems adding more pressed books to the pool. You do.

 

What I do have a problem with is lack of disclosure not because I care about pressing, but because I respect the opinions of those who do care.

 

Once the books leave my hands, there is no enforcement, either when I sell a books that has been pressed and disclosed, when we press a book for a customer or when you sell a book that has been pressed and disclosed.

 

Pressing books was never the issue. Disclosure is. That is the NOD's official stance on this issue and it always has been. There is no conflict of interest in this matter.

 

So you're entirely comfortable in the knowledge that many of the books that you press will be sold without disclosure, either immediately or a ways down the road?

 

Because that to me in where the conflict of interest arises. You know that because of your actions, there will be more books sold without disclosure in the marketplace.

 

Yet you're allegedly fighting to have less books sold without disclosure in the marketplace.

[qualitycomix]

Because that's what you and JJ are asking Brent to do, be responsible for all the books that he presses once they leave his hands.

 

This is precisely the point...Brent cannot be held responsible...it's simply impossible as well as unrealistic & unreasonable.

 

Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?

 

He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool.

 

And please don't try and make the connection between what Brent is doing (pressing books) with what I'm doing (selling books).

 

I will take every step that I am able to minimise the 'problem'.

 

I will not press books.

 

I will not have books pressed.

 

If I am selling a book that I know has been pressed, I will proactively disclose.

 

Actually, there's a 'grade comment' field on the database, used for such things as 'date stamp back cover', 'interior page tear', etc., etc. One of the fields is 'pressed'.

 

I trust that these measures are sufficient?

 

"He has become an active enabler because he's personally adding more pressed books to the pool."

 

"Therefore, as it's impossible to control, why would he add to the problem that he's fighting against by producing more pressed books into the pool, a proportion of which aren't going to be disclosed upon resale?"

 

-----------------------

Regarding the above statements Nick, I've been personally adding more pressed books to the pool for 7 years. I've also disclosed.

 

I have no problems adding more pressed books to the pool. You do.

 

What I do have a problem with is lack of disclosure not because I care about pressing, but because I respect the opinions of those who do care.

 

Once the books leave my hands, there is no enforcement, either when I sell a books that has been pressed and disclosed, when we press a book for a customer or when you sell a book that has been pressed and disclosed.

 

Pressing books was never the issue. Disclosure is. That is the NOD's official stance on this issue and it always has been. There is no conflict of interest in this matter.

 

So you're entirely comfortable in the knowledge that many of the books that you press will be sold without disclosure, either immediately or a ways down the road?

 

Because that to me in where the conflict of interest arises. You know that because of your actions, there will be more books sold without disclosure in the marketplace.

 

Yet you're allegedly fighting to have less books sold without disclosure in the marketplace.

 

Ultimately, none of us can control another's actions. In a perfect world, disclosure is the standard and non-disclosure is the exception. In our imperfect world, I do my part and I can only encourage others to do the same.

 

I personally don't care if books are sold pressed or not, BUT I respect those that do want to know if a book has been pressed. So as a business decision a LONG time ago, I decided disclosure was the best route, although not the easy route.

 

Others can make their own decisions regarding this issue. The NOD was formed for a multitude of reasons with the primary emphasis on disclosure, not just of pressing but of ANY form of restoration or work that has been done to the comic. For instance, restoration removal, staple replacement, disassembly etc. All of those issues are JUST AS IMPORTANT if not MORE IMPORTANT than the issue of pressing. Yet the pressing issue dominates these boards.

 

Most get tired of the ongoing debate which will never be fully resolved.