Disclosure - Yes Or No?

[gaz973]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

Roy, you just seem to keep moving around the basic point. Disclosure of known facts whether it be that a book is pressed or unpressed should be the norm because it's a fact that may be of relevance to potential buyers. The truth is the truth how ever you look at it.

 

Getting people to disclose that they are selling unpressed books isn't dificult anyway since it's usually in their interests to get potential extra interest from both sides of the coin.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

I said this a while ago, however, I didn't follow it through to its logical conclusion and haven't stayed away from the myriad of Pressing threads since that revelation.

[Flaming_Telepath]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

No, Roy, that might suit your argument, but it is simply not true. You are saying that if a seller can't say whether a book has been pressed, it will be automatically considered to be unpressed by the buyers???

 

What do you think we are? ing monkeys? You think we should only be fed information that we can handle by the sophisticated, educated pressers? You think we the buyers might jump to conclusions that are incorrect, so you the seller must protect us from ourselves?

 

Here's how 'telling what you know' works. There are four statements that can be made about a book...

 

(1) This book is not pressed

 

(2) This book has been pressed

 

(3) This book exhibits all the signs of having been pressed

 

(4) I have no idea whether this book has been pressed

 

As a seller, you give us one of those statements for every book and, providing you have told the truth, you have done your duty and unheld honest, open, ethical values. It doesn't matter what the potential buyer does with that information, he/she simply wants to have it and it is not for you to say whether he's intelligent enough to process it correctly.

 

Tell us what you know and then let us amoeba-brained sub-species figure out the rest for ourselves.

[Flaming_Telepath]

As for the argument that people who don't want pressed books 'already own pressed books and are extremely likely to buy more, so why bother'...

 

We know that...we're not quite that dumb. However, we'd like to cut down the chances. It's an utterly defeatist attitude...you can't get rid of the problem, so why bother even attempting to mitigate it?...and again, it's down to the consumer whether they adopt it or not.

 

But it can only be down to the consumer, rather than the seller, if all known information is offered.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

No, Roy, that might suit your argument, but it is simply not true. You are saying that if a seller can't say whether a book has been pressed, it will be automatically considered to be unpressed by the buyers???

 

What do you think we are? ing monkeys? You think we should only be fed information that we can handle by the sophisticated, educated pressers? You think we the buyers might jump to conclusions that are incorrect, so you the seller must protect us from ourselves?

 

Here's how 'telling what you know' works. There are four statements that can be made about a book...

 

(1) This book is not pressed

 

(2) This book has been pressed

 

(3) This book exhibits all the signs of having been pressed

 

(4) I have no idea whether this book has been pressed

 

As a seller, you give us one of those statements for every book and, providing you have told the truth, you have done your duty and unheld honest, open, ethical values. It doesn't matter what the potential buyer does with that information, he/she simply wants to have it and it is not for you to say whether he's intelligent enough to process it correctly.

 

Tell us what you know and then let us amoeba-brained sub-species figure out the rest for ourselves.

 

What's there left to figure out as a buyer Nick? Your four options cover pretty much every possibility, and put the onus squarely on the seller.

 

I like # 2, and use it often. Its the only "concrete" option of the four. The rest (unless we are talking about an OO book), are a bit too ambitious for my taste. Even # 4, while on the surface seemingly valuable, casts both a shadow and a spotlight on the book ("sure, it might be pressed, or it might not, who knows?") and unless they are someone who has made a lot of direct Post-Pressing observations, don't seem to be of much value.

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

No, Roy, that might suit your argument, but it is simply not true. You are saying that if a seller can't say whether a book has been pressed, it will be automatically considered to be unpressed by the buyers???

 

What do you think we are? ing monkeys? You think we should only be fed information that we can handle by the sophisticated, educated pressers? You think we the buyers might jump to conclusions that are incorrect, so you the seller must protect us from ourselves?

 

Here's how 'telling what you know' works. There are four statements that can be made about a book...

 

(1) This book is not pressed

 

(2) This book has been pressed

 

(3) This book exhibits all the signs of having been pressed

 

(4) I have no idea whether this book has been pressed

 

As a seller, you give us one of those statements for every book and, providing you have told the truth, you have done your duty and unheld honest, open, ethical values. It doesn't matter what the potential buyer does with that information, he/she simply wants to have it and it is not for you to say whether he's intelligent enough to process it correctly.

 

Tell us what you know and then let us amoeba-brained sub-species figure out the rest for ourselves.

 

What's there left to figure out as a buyer Nick? Your four options cover pretty much every possibility, and put the onus squarely on the seller.

 

I like # 2, and use it often. Its the only "concrete" option of the four. The rest (unless we are talking about an OO book), are a bit too ambitious for my taste. Even # 4, while on the surface seemingly valuable, casts both a shadow and a spotlight on the book ("sure, it might be pressed, or it might not, who knows?") and unless they are someone who has made a lot of direct Post-Pressing observations, don't seem to be of much value.

 

 

 

You're joking, right?

 

Is the book priced fairly?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to grade?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to detect resto?

 

Do I trust the seller to actually ship the book?

 

Do I trust the seller to pack the book properly?

 

Do I trust that the scan hasn't be favourably adjusted?

 

And on, and on, and on...

 

And as for whether you as a seller think the information is useful or not is utterly irrelevant...72% of the board want it offered. It's all very Jack Nicholson...'You can't handle the truth!'

[drewincanada]

Roy, you already said that there are only two useful, unequivocal pieces of information that a seller could give to a buyer, which are (1) and (2) on Nick's list above.

 

So why would you now say that only option (1) is relevant and useful?

 

In theory, if a seller wants to disclose all of the facts, they only need to state (1) or (2). If they haven't stated (1) or (2), then it implies (4). That is, of course, if you know the seller is someone who will consistently disclose (1) or (2).

 

But I see now that a seller's opinion (option 3 above) can also be useful, provided you know and trust the seller's knowledge and opinion.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

No, Roy, that might suit your argument, but it is simply not true. You are saying that if a seller can't say whether a book has been pressed, it will be automatically considered to be unpressed by the buyers???

 

What do you think we are? ing monkeys? You think we should only be fed information that we can handle by the sophisticated, educated pressers? You think we the buyers might jump to conclusions that are incorrect, so you the seller must protect us from ourselves?

 

Here's how 'telling what you know' works. There are four statements that can be made about a book...

 

(1) This book is not pressed

 

(2) This book has been pressed

 

(3) This book exhibits all the signs of having been pressed

 

(4) I have no idea whether this book has been pressed

 

As a seller, you give us one of those statements for every book and, providing you have told the truth, you have done your duty and unheld honest, open, ethical values. It doesn't matter what the potential buyer does with that information, he/she simply wants to have it and it is not for you to say whether he's intelligent enough to process it correctly.

 

Tell us what you know and then let us amoeba-brained sub-species figure out the rest for ourselves.

 

What's there left to figure out as a buyer Nick? Your four options cover pretty much every possibility, and put the onus squarely on the seller.

 

I like # 2, and use it often. Its the only "concrete" option of the four. The rest (unless we are talking about an OO book), are a bit too ambitious for my taste. Even # 4, while on the surface seemingly valuable, casts both a shadow and a spotlight on the book ("sure, it might be pressed, or it might not, who knows?") and unless they are someone who has made a lot of direct Post-Pressing observations, don't seem to be of much value.

 

 

 

You're joking, right?

 

Is the book priced fairly?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to grade?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to detect resto?

 

Do I trust the seller to actually ship the book?

 

Do I trust the seller to pack the book properly?

 

Do I trust that the scan hasn't be favourably adjusted?

 

And on, and on, and on...

 

And as for whether you as a seller think the information is useful or not is utterly irrelevant...72% of the board want it offered. It's all very Jack Nicholson...'You can't handle the truth!'

 

Seriously Nick, you need to get off your High Horse. And should think about dismounting willingly rather then falling flat on your face with responses like this.

 

First off, your 72% poll only covers the question you asked about expectations about Disclosure if Pressing is known. Nowhere did I read where your 4-point Gobbedlygook of Pressing options was what was up for vote. So, please get your facts straight.

 

My comment about "figuring it out" involved the subject of Pressing only. Your suggestion insures that the seller is responsible for providing information that, in many cases, requires them to make a guess. What happens when someone who really doesn't know unwittingly sells a book that was pressed to someone who thinks they can spot it? Does the buyer then make it a public spectacle (as most posters around here seem to do) and accuse the seller of choosing Option # 4 when clearly he should've gone with Option # 3?

 

There are so many Can of Worms to be opened, its not even funny.

 

More information is not neccessarily a good thing, when it involves one party to hazard a guess that may or may not be true.

 

Say its Pressed if you know it was Pressed, and offer a return policy to insure a buyer is happy (for whatever reason) to account for the other possibilities. What else can a reasonable seller do?

 

 

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

'I am unaware that this book has been pressed.'

 

'I don't know whether this book has been manipulated or not.'

 

'To the best of my knowledge, this book has not been pressed.'

 

Gobbledygook?

 

Really?

 

It is simply a seller saying that he doesn't know, whichever way he wants to phrase it.

 

As was posted very early in this thread, if that is the truth, that is fine and dandy. It is NOT a guess. Nobody is asking for anybody to guess. Tell what you know.

 

It really is that simple.

[comicwiz]

A VOC meter would likely pick-up silica, however as you start to move towards more sensitive meters (some measure parts per billion), it would be difficult to isolate the compound that is triggering a reading or alarm.

 

If you follow your link, there's a list of 252 compounds that VOC meter can detect, but silica isn't on the list. Are you sure it's silica that forms the slick surface of release paper? I found those things cost around $4000...I'm guessing you worked somewhere in the past that had one?

 

I've got a roll of release paper right here that's been sitting unused for 5+ years, but I'm not sure I can see lost sheen in the areas I was using. I was doing spot pressing and haven't used a dry mount press because I don't own one...what were you doing when you've seen the sheen come off of release paper? What temperature was the heat source at?

 

There are meters that do. This is the only example I could find online to show you more or less how one looks like. The instrument I'm thinking costs about $7K and I haven't been able to find a reference anywhere online of it. There are other ways that Silica air monitoring is performed (worksite safety, home safety) and that process involves measuring contamination over longer periods of time using several measurement techniques.

 

I haven't been able to test all the theories I've raised, but I've mostly been doing observational testing using 2 different types of release papers, a dry-mount press, at varying temperatures (on average 83-90° F (180-194° C). A lot about the way the transfer occurs is dependent on the heat, the length of time the book is exposed, and how the book is cooled. Having said all this, you could very well simulate the same transfer effect using a tacking iron.

 

I hope you can appreciate that I've spent some time researching/thinking this through and there is so much detail I want to share on the subject. If this is something that interests you, I've given enough information away that you could test some of these assumptions yourself. Nothing has been proven, and as I've said there is a great deal of work ahead in terms of interpreting the results of the analysis, but the methodology and instrumentation part are already readily available and being used in a number of testing applications. It really is a matter of migrating some of those methods to detect the presence of silica on comics, which has really no business being there for any other purpose than to press a comic.

[gaz973]

I wouldn't trust nearly anyone's opinion enough to take notice of them offering an opinon on if they think a book might have been pressed. If they stick to yes, no or don't know then I'll be satisfied

[fantastic_four]

I haven't been able to test all the theories I've raised, but I've mostly been doing observational testing using 2 different types of release papers, a dry-mount press, at varying temperatures (on average 83-90° F (180-194° C). A lot about the way the transfer occurs is dependent on the heat, the length of time the book is exposed, and how the book is cooled. Having said all this, you could very well simulate the same transfer effect using a tacking iron.

 

There's two problems I have with silica testing -- you can effectively press minor dents and bends at temperatures much lower than 180 degrees as I have without silica loss that I can see--I could be wrong and will test this more--and I'm hugely skeptical silica flaking off of release paper is an inevitable result of pressing. I'd be very surprised if there aren't alternatives to prevent burning and warping than silica-flaking release paper. I've used looseleaf paper with an iron without burning or warping of the paper at relatively low temperatures, and I'm optimistic there are other options offering similar safety to silica-covered release paper, although I could easily be wrong as I've not researched it. I'd still try experimenting with silica detection if not for the steep price tag on testing equipment.

 

I'm much more optimistic about what we were discussing in one of the recently-bumped pressing threads--microscopic surface analysis to look for identifiable patterns following a press. My skepticism about that technique is that the patterns left by pressing will resemble natural processes, but it's 50/50 until you do the analysis, it could go either way.

[comicwiz]

I haven't been able to test all the theories I've raised, but I've mostly been doing observational testing using 2 different types of release papers, a dry-mount press, at varying temperatures (on average 83-90° F (180-194° C). A lot about the way the transfer occurs is dependent on the heat, the length of time the book is exposed, and how the book is cooled. Having said all this, you could very well simulate the same transfer effect using a tacking iron.

 

There's two problems I have with silica testing -- you can effectively press minor dents and bends at temperatures much lower than 180 degrees as I have without silica loss that I can see--I could be wrong and will test this more--and I'm hugely skeptical silica flaking off of release paper is an inevitable result of pressing. I'd be very surprised if there aren't alternatives to prevent burning and warping than silica-flaking release paper. I've used looseleaf paper with an iron without burning or warping of the paper, and I'm optimistic there are other options offering similar safety to silica-covered release paper, although I could easily be wrong as I've not researched it. I'd still try experimenting with silica detection if not for the steep price tag on testing equipment.

 

I'm much more optimistic about what we were discussing in one of the recently-bumped pressing threads--microscopic surface analysis to look for identifiable patterns following a press. My skepticism about that technique is that the patterns left by pressing will resemble natural processes, but it's 50/50 until you do the analysis, it could go either way.

 

You realize that silica-leech and off-gassing can occur with fluctuations of temperature or humidity, and under normal conditions of temperature and pressure? Heating is one sure-fire method of impregnating the fibers in paper with silica.

[fantastic_four]

You realize the silica-leech and off-gassing can occur with fluctuations of temperature or humidity, and under normal conditions of temperature and pressure? Heating is one sure-fire method of impregnating the fibers in paper with silica.

 

No, all I know is release paper has a super-slick surface that feels somewhat like a candle, which is why I called it "wax paper" earlier, I hadn't used it since around 2005 and forgot what it's called. I had no idea that stuff is silica, nor do I have any idea about its properties. Is silica even on both sides of the paper? Does it need to be?

[comicwiz]

You realize the silica-leech and off-gassing can occur with fluctuations of temperature or humidity, and under normal conditions of temperature and pressure? Heating is one sure-fire method of impregnating the fibers in paper with silica.

 

No, all I know is release paper has a super-slick surface that feels somewhat like a candle, which is why I called it "wax paper" earlier, I hadn't used it since around 2005 and forgot what it's called. I had no idea that stuff is silica, nor do I have any idea about its properties. Is silica even on both sides of the paper? Does it need to be?

 

Yes, otherwise you would bake a hypothetical uncoated side to a comics interior pages, to say nothing of the damage it would do to the press if any of the cover facing (again, hypothetically uncoated) paper sides were exposed to the heat from the platen(s).

[Flaming_Telepath]

Say its Pressed if you know it was Pressed, and offer a return policy to insure a buyer is happy (for whatever reason) to account for the other possibilities. What else can a reasonable seller do?

 

 

And that's 100% correct. That's called pro-active disclosure, which is what is being asked for.

 

And to save the questions, PMs, etc., you might want to preface a sales thread with 'all books that have been pressed will be duly noted'. Or 'I am a seller who proactively discloses'.

 

My four options were simply laying out all possible statements that could apply, that a seller could choose to use.

 

But the only one that really matters is 'I will tell you if I know'.

[8milemax]

why another pressing thread? I know this question has been asked before. FT says he started a new poll for the noobs, have you ever heard of search Pressing threads are alot like Alley bat, they keep coming back!!

[8milemax]

But why not disclose elsewhere? If you believe in pro-active disclosure, that is.

 

Because I believe that disclosing which books are unequivocally unpressed is much more useful, more material and more concrete than saying "these books were pressed by me" all the while falsely putting all undisclosed/possibly pressed/maybe unpressed books in the unpressed category when in fact it is just an illusion.

 

There's becoming less and less maybe about it. Borock was right.

 

 

No, Roy, that might suit your argument, but it is simply not true. You are saying that if a seller can't say whether a book has been pressed, it will be automatically considered to be unpressed by the buyers???

 

What do you think we are? ing monkeys? You think we should only be fed information that we can handle by the sophisticated, educated pressers? You think we the buyers might jump to conclusions that are incorrect, so you the seller must protect us from ourselves?

 

Here's how 'telling what you know' works. There are four statements that can be made about a book...

 

(1) This book is not pressed

 

(2) This book has been pressed

 

(3) This book exhibits all the signs of having been pressed

 

(4) I have no idea whether this book has been pressed

 

As a seller, you give us one of those statements for every book and, providing you have told the truth, you have done your duty and unheld honest, open, ethical values. It doesn't matter what the potential buyer does with that information, he/she simply wants to have it and it is not for you to say whether he's intelligent enough to process it correctly.

 

Tell us what you know and then let us amoeba-brained sub-species figure out the rest for ourselves.

 

What's there left to figure out as a buyer Nick? Your four options cover pretty much every possibility, and put the onus squarely on the seller.

 

I like # 2, and use it often. Its the only "concrete" option of the four. The rest (unless we are talking about an OO book), are a bit too ambitious for my taste. Even # 4, while on the surface seemingly valuable, casts both a shadow and a spotlight on the book ("sure, it might be pressed, or it might not, who knows?") and unless they are someone who has made a lot of direct Post-Pressing observations, don't seem to be of much value.

 

 

 

You're joking, right?

 

Is the book priced fairly?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to grade?

 

Do I trust the seller's ability to detect resto?

 

Do I trust the seller to actually ship the book?

 

Do I trust the seller to pack the book properly?

 

Do I trust that the scan hasn't be favourably adjusted?

 

And on, and on, and on...

 

And as for whether you as a seller think the information is useful or not is utterly irrelevant...72% of the board want it offered. It's all very Jack Nicholson...'You can't handle the truth!'

 

Seriously Nick, you need to get off your High Horse. And should think about dismounting willingly rather then falling flat on your face with responses like this.

 

First off, your 72% poll only covers the question you asked about expectations about Disclosure if Pressing is known. Nowhere did I read where your 4-point Gobbedlygook of Pressing options was what was up for vote. So, please get your facts straight.

 

My comment about "figuring it out" involved the subject of Pressing only. Your suggestion insures that the seller is responsible for providing information that, in many cases, requires them to make a guess. What happens when someone who really doesn't know unwittingly sells a book that was pressed to someone who thinks they can spot it? Does the buyer then make it a public spectacle (as most posters around here seem to do) and accuse the seller of choosing Option # 4 when clearly he should've gone with Option # 3?

 

There are so many Can of Worms to be opened, its not even funny.

 

More information is not neccessarily a good thing, when it involves one party to hazard a guess that may or may not be true.

 

Say its Pressed if you know it was Pressed, and offer a return policy to insure a buyer is happy (for whatever reason) to account for the other possibilities. What else can a reasonable seller do?

 

 

 

 

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

why another pressing thread? I know this question has been asked before. FT says he started a new poll for the noobs, have you ever heard of search Pressing threads are alot like Alley bat, they keep coming back!!

 

We <3 Pressing Threads.

 

And you really shouldn't even use Nick's good name in the same paragraph as He_Who_Shall_Not_Be_Named.

[Old Fashion PB and J]

'I am unaware that this book has been pressed.'

 

'I don't know whether this book has been manipulated or not.'

 

'To the best of my knowledge, this book has not been pressed.'

 

Gobbledygook?

 

Really?

 

It is simply a seller saying that he doesn't know, whichever way he wants to phrase it.

 

As was posted very early in this thread, if that is the truth, that is fine and dandy. It is NOT a guess. Nobody is asking for anybody to guess. Tell what you know.

 

It really is that simple.

Nick,

People can not be honest when money is involved. The people who are all saying that disclosure is not necessary are just sellers you know NOT to deal with.