Jerry's All Star #8 better pics

[Forbush-Man]

Sounds like this matter was resolved two years ago.

 

And just like a waitress with a bad memory, it just keeps coming back at ya.

[rockman2008]

Sounds like this matter was resolved two years ago.

 

And just like a waitress with a bad memory, it just keeps coming back at ya.

 

No kidding. Three threads. As to who is really out of line here, it turns out not to be the "peanut gallery" but "Buffalo Bob" shoveling the buffalo.

[Wayne-Tec]

AF15Kid,

 

I know you didn't make fun of anyone's appearance and I'm not accusing you of doing so. I am criticizing your accusations of hypocrisy, which you again renew, based on conduct that seems to be the normal standard of care. Since you admit that BLB's conduct is not at issue with the JSA 7 and 8 (your words: "the two are not directly related"), and provides no defense for CGC, why bring it up at all?

 

I do realize that for better or worse, laying your comic books out in that fashion has become something of the norm. I do not personally agree with it but as I said before, it is every collector's right to enjoy their books in any way that gives them the most happiness.

 

Had this been Bob's collection and had he laid the books out similar to the ways that other boardies have shared, I would have felt the same way but probably wouldn't have said anything as I wouldn't want to offend anyone. I've brought this topic up before and while I feel that I have done so politely and have not offended anyone, the general consensus has been that they are just comic books and you should enjoy them without worrying so much.

 

I can respect that.

 

This was just as instance where Bob pointed out an alleged lack of care on CGC's part while he himself didn't appear to be using as much care as he could have when the books were in his possession. Had they been his books it would have been a different story but since he pointed out an alleged lack of care on CGC's part, I figured it would be worthy to mention that he himself did not appear to use as much care as he could of.

 

It seemed hypocritical to me. I never meant to imply that because of that, he didn't have the right to bring up his case. As you said, he could have used the AS #25 as a coffee-mat and that wouldn't make his AS #8 argument any less legit.

 

I understand the level of liability CGC has when books are in their possession, hence, one would expect them to use exceptional care but if (and correct me if I'm mistaken) Bob has been put in charge of caring for the books in question, shouldn't he be using just as much care; even if it might seem to be a little over-kill?

 

Again, I'm not even saying refuse to take them out to take some pictures (I wouldn't personally, but you can only protect against so much) but don't you think the way the AS #25 was positioned is just a little bit risky? Wouldn't it be safer to keep heavy objects off of tables that close to the books? Don't get me wrong, I could see why some would view this as being over-protective, it's just my opinion that when you're caring for someone elses books, you really should take those kinds of precautions.

 

Since you've asked me, I've tried to go into greater detail even though my original intent was not to inspect every single aspect of a particular photograph. I just tried to point out the things that jumped out at me. I didn't mean it as anything personal against Bob and if I offended him or anyone else, I'll be the first person to apologize.

 

I don't have a dry sense of humor and it's never my intention to give other board members a hard time for my own amusement. Like everyone else on the boards, I'm just hear to talk about the same thing we're all passionate about.

 

Label me as being over-protective when it comes to comic-handling if you'd like as I imagine that label would fit quite well; I promise I won't take it personal. (thumbs u

[sfcityduck]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

[rockman2008]

All I know is if I ever went into court and tried to use that picture without anything else to make the assumption that BLB restored the All Star #8, the judge would laugh at me.

Only after he got over the hearty guffaw (literally side-splitting laughter) he had at listening to Bob's case.

 

If I went into court as a known meth dealer and someone showed a picture of meth making equipment in my office, and I told the judge I was developing meth for my own research purposes not for commerce...wouldn't the judge laugh at me?

 

I know Bob isn't anywhere close to a meth dealer. The fact remains he plies his trade in old comic books and he's been identified in a picture of comic book resto equipment by a resto expert. It just stretches incredulity a bit to hear Bob say it's for research purposes only. I'm beginning to see the AS 8 case as someone trying to take advantage of a series of unfortunate situations with CGC. At best it looks like a variation on the old insurance claim scam.

[Foolkiller]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

I think this is right. However, let me also add that Borock's response also ends any legitimate discussion in this thread about whether or not BLB is entitled to any more money. I think CGC handled this fairly for everyone involved.

[nearmint]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

I think this is right. However, let me also add that Borock's response also ends any legitimate discussion in this thread about whether or not BLB is entitled to any more money. I think CGC handled this fairly for everyone involved.

 

In my experience, CGC bends over backwards to do exactly that.

[Aman619]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

I think this is right. However, let me also add that Borock's response also ends any legitimate discussion in this thread about whether or not BLB is entitled to any more money. I think CGC handled this fairly for everyone involved.

 

 

yup!

 

 

...except for the 10K CGC still owes Bob! : )

[Silver Surfer]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

I think this is right. However, let me also add that Borock's response also ends any legitimate discussion in this thread about whether or not BLB is entitled to any more money. I think CGC handled this fairly for everyone involved.

 

In my experience, CGC bends me over to do exactly that.

 

[rockman2008]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

I think this is right. However, let me also add that Borock's response also ends any legitimate discussion in this thread about whether or not BLB is entitled to any more money. I think CGC handled this fairly for everyone involved.

yup!

...except for the 10K CGC still owes Bob! : )

 

Oh yeah. I think CGC should pay Bob at least 10K to stop posting threads on their forums. Hush money.

[Silver Surfer]

Where is Bob?

[Scrooge]

Busy scrapbooking.

[buttock]

Methinks ye olde Bob hath a few too many tinctures of Percocet, yet tis but my opine...

 

Forsooth!

[1962]

All I know is if I ever went into court and tried to use that picture without anything else to make the assumption that BLB restored the All Star #8, the judge would laugh at me.

Only after he got over the hearty guffaw (literally side-splitting laughter) he had at listening to Bob's case.

 

If I went into court as a known meth dealer and someone showed a picture of meth making equipment in my office, and I told the judge I was developing meth for my own research purposes not for commerce...wouldn't the judge laugh at me?

 

I know Bob isn't anywhere close to a meth dealer. The fact remains he plies his trade in old comic books and he's been identified in a picture of comic book resto equipment by a resto expert. It just stretches incredulity a bit to hear Bob say it's for research purposes only. I'm beginning to see the AS 8 case as someone trying to take advantage of a series of unfortunate situations with CGC. At best it looks like a variation on the old insurance claim scam.

 

Yes the judge would probably laugh at you under the meth dealer scenario for research purposes. Seriously, I understand where you are coming from in regards to the old insurance claim scam. I will be brief on a couple of quick observations of the different scenarios

 

1. Meth equipment is used generally for only one purpose, to produce meth. The restoration tools in the photo can be used for a number of things not related to comic book resto.

2. Meth even for research purposes is illegal on its face.

3. The All Star #8 in the picture is one of only a number of books in the picture with Bob. In addition even if we were to assume that Bob was operating a known comic book restoration operation, it would be hard to pinpoint it directly that Bob did the work on the All Star #8, especially when the book has been in existence for many years and most likely passed through many hands.

 

The photo would be good if you could tie it into a witness testifying something along the lines of "Yeah I talked to Bob about the Bail's All Star Run and he told me he was going to fix them up, so they looked real nice before he submitted them to CGC" or something to that effect. Hey just my I am sure the other attorneys on this board have additional observations.

 

[Bronty]

I think this thread should be relabelled "how to make oneself look ridiculous." Come on Bob. You're far too young to act this batty.

[adamstrange]

Busy scrapbooking.

 

That's what came to my mind when I saw tacking iron and glue.

[Wayne-Tec]

AF15Kid,

 

What you are doing is known as the Fallacy of False Equivalence.

 

There is no analogy to be made between (1) mishandling a book to the extent you got tape on the cover (an error that CGC admitted and apparently rectified, in part, by firing the responsible employee) and (2) propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table. There is no equivalence. There is no hypocrisy. The right course of action is for you to stop calling BLB a hypocrit and move on.

 

 

But I never claimed for the two to be equivalent. If you look back to my posts, you will notice that I was talking about the way that CGC handled the #8 (the alleged popped staple) and did not focus as much on the #7; not because it is any less important (as the tape incident would be a more serious error) but because the main focus has been on the #8.

 

But just as you noted that Bob's handling of the books has nothing to do with CGC's errors, CGC's errors have nothing to do with how Bob handled the books. Two very seperate instances as has already been noted. Again if you go back to my comments, you should gather that I was more concerned with the way that the AS #25 was propped up than the other books. I was also more concerned with the way the books were stacked in the back, not the fact that they were stacked.

 

You're remarks stating my issue of "propping a comic up for photographing while encased in mylar and supported by a backing board or stacking mylar/backed comics on a table" are a bit misleading as while yes I did mention standing the books up, my greater issue was the way the #25 was propped up specifically and how uneven the stack of comics on the back table were.

 

So I'm not sure if I'm understanding your point here. In the event that there might be a mis-communication, I will try to clearify myself...I am not implying that the two instances (CGC's alleged errors & Bob's handling of the books within the photos) are equivalent; but rather, that Bob himself could have used greater care.

 

Especially in the instances for which I posted pics.

[MrBedrock]

I think CGC should pay Bob at least 10K to stop posting threads on their forums. Hush money.

You hush! I get too much enjoyment out of reading Bob's looney rambling. Heck, I think we should all pitch in and send him a few bucks for the hours of wacky entertainment he provides. Long Live Beerbohm (and his bum hip, car wrecks, San Fransisco collection stories, his bum hip, Obidiah Oldbuck, Jerry's All-Stars, his display racks and his bum hip (thumbs u ).

[seanfingh]

 

The way he was treating his display in Chicago, you should add a couple of bucks for PVC pipe as well.

[MrBedrock]

Done, Thanks (thumbs u