Disclosure - Yes Or No?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Pressing seems to be back in vogue this week, so let's have a poll!

 

I don't like pressing ( ), but I reluctantly accept that it happens. Personally, I therefore think the ethical thing to do is pro-actively disclose if a book has been pressed.

 

Whilst selling at a show or through a site, there is the excuse that 'nobody cares about pressing other than on the CGC boards'. I don't agree with that sentiment, but I can understand how it can sort of float.

 

However, here it has previously been made very clear that a large chunk of the community...including a number of pressers and pro-pressers...expects pro-active disclosure.

 

So that begs the question...given that we are supposedly a community and given that we are all fully aware of the 'issue' and given that a PM exchange asking 'the question' can cost you a chance at a book, should pro-active disclosure be expected...maybe even demanded...in the Marketplace?

 

 

 

[Mr.Diggler]

Yes.

[joeypost]

I voted yes.

[Forbush-Man]

Hells YES!

 

I will if I sell a pressed book. It's just plain the right thing to do. (thumbs u

[comicwiz]

I'm staying on the sideline on this one. I expected common courtesy too, and that got thrown out the window last week when I got threatened by someone on eBay just because I politely declined to trade a 3K book for a $100 book.

 

Anyhow, what's the problem with asking?

 

If what I'm reading into your post is any indication on how adamantly opposed you are to owing a pressed book, then it follows that you place a higher importance on asking before buying. If that's the case, it shouldn't matter if asking costs you a chance at the book.

 

And for what it's worth, there is such a think as asking to put the book on hold until you can clarify buying terms with the seller.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I'm staying on the sideline on this one. I expected common courtesy too, and that got thrown out the window last week when I got threatened by someone on eBay just because I declined to trade a 3K book for a $100 book.

 

Anyhow, what's the problem with asking?

 

Without getting into the whole 'why should you have to, other forms of resto are disclosed' debate, it genuinely could cost you a book that you did want...and I also think it's good manners. But that's just me.

 

 

And for what it's worth, there is such a think as asking to put the book on hold until you can clarify sales terms with the seller.

 

Well, that entirely depends on the seller's terms for the thread. Some people will demand a straight ...or all bets are off.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I'm staying on the sideline on this one. I expected common courtesy too, and that got thrown out the window last week when I got threatened by someone on eBay just because I politely declined to trade a 3K book for a $100 book.

 

And whilst this is pretty , what does it have to do with me, the boards or pressing?

[Forbush-Man]

I'd like to add that I have no problem with pressing or pressed books. I will buy a pressed book & I will sell a pressed book. But when I sell the book, I will disclose. I expect that same business sense & courtesy when I buy.

 

It all comes down to disclosure.

[comicwiz]

I'm staying on the sideline on this one. I expected common courtesy too, and that got thrown out the window last week when I got threatened by someone on eBay just because I politely declined to trade a 3K book for a $100 book.

 

And whilst this is pretty , what does it have to do with me, the boards or pressing?

 

We expect a lot from one another. Extending courtesy should be primal, almost instinctive. My point is, it isn't a given. I'd like for people to disclose a lot of things about a book, but ultimately, it is up to me to ask to make sure I'm getting a book with a clean bill of health.

[ashsaytr]

I would like as much information on a book when purchasing as available... I don't care if people press or not... but at least you have the ability to make your choice based on all info~

[BigLeagueCHEW]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

[fantastic_four]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

 

What different does slabbing make to disclosure?

[ashsaytr]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

...i must be missing your point?

[BigLeagueCHEW]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

...i must be missing your point?

 

I am just saying if you press it and slab it once then it really doesn't hurt the book. What is the chance of it being opened again and getting damaged.

 

I know if I pressed it and kept it raw I would disclose because the new owner may end up doing it down the road and it could have an impact, to much pressing over the same area is bad.

[BigLeagueCHEW]

I would compare pressing to painless dent removal service, does that really need to be disclosed when you sell a car, no.

[paperheart]

yes, complete no brainer

[comicwiz]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

...i must be missing your point?

 

I am just saying if you press it and slab it once then it really doesn't hurt the book. What is the chance of it being opened again and getting damaged.

 

I know if I pressed it and kept it raw I would disclose because the new owner may end up doing it down the road and it could have an impact, to much pressing over the same area is bad.

 

Books can, and have been pressed more than once. The damage debate has solid points on both sides of the argument. I guess where I have trouble with the whole disclosure topic is that I have no control over what happened with the book prior to it coming into my possession. So if pro-active disclosure means saying all books I have may have been pressed, and that makes the anti-pressing side happy, I would tell them to assume all books are pressed before they should expect people to use a blanket disclosure approach.

[zuckuss2003]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

...i must be missing your point?

 

I am just saying if you press it and slab it once then it really doesn't hurt the book. What is the chance of it being opened again and getting damaged.

 

I know if I pressed it and kept it raw I would disclose because the new owner may end up doing it down the road and it could have an impact, to much pressing over the same area is bad.

 

Books can, and have been pressed more than once. The damage debate has solid points on both sides of the argument. I guess where I have trouble with the whole disclosure topic is that I have no control over what happened with the book prior to it coming into my possession. So if pro-active disclosure means saying all books I have may have been pressed, and that makes the anti-pressing side happy, I would tell them to assume all books are pressed before they should expect people to use a blanket disclosure approach.

 

I assume the poll is regarding actively disclosing about "known" pressed books. You are correct in that you may not entirely know a history of a book, but if you bought it knowing it was pressed and then resell it, you should state it was pressed.

[Flaming_Telepath]

If it was pressed then placed in a slab, who cares. If it was pressed and passed around raw, then yes.

...i must be missing your point?

 

I am just saying if you press it and slab it once then it really doesn't hurt the book. What is the chance of it being opened again and getting damaged.

 

I know if I pressed it and kept it raw I would disclose because the new owner may end up doing it down the road and it could have an impact, to much pressing over the same area is bad.

 

Books can, and have been pressed more than once. The damage debate has solid points on both sides of the argument. I guess where I have trouble with the whole disclosure topic is that I have no control over what happened with the book prior to it coming into my possession. So if pro-active disclosure means saying all books I have may have been pressed, and that makes the anti-pressing side happy, I would tell them to assume all books are pressed before they should expect people to use a blanket disclosure approach.

 

What about people who take a raw, unmanipulated book, press it, slab it and immediately sell it here?

 

Would that not deserve/require pro-active disclosure?

 

Because most of the 'anti-pressing' side has agreed that it will also accept 'this book has not to my knowledge been pressed' if that is genuinely the case.

[fantastic_four]

I would compare pressing to painless dent removal service, does that really need to be disclosed when you sell a car, no.

 

Then why did you vote to disclose pressing on a raw book? Your comparison of comic dents to car dents seems to imply you'd vote for no disclosure or for disclosure being optional.