Disclosure - Yes Or No?

[Trey Cannon]

I'm so glad you guys are getting a laugh at my expense. I never said I was prince charming. Seriously though I am a pretty good guy I don't think the people I have met would disagree

[comicdonna]

I forget, did the coinees ever decide whether cleaning is fine? I know it used to put a bee up everybody's butt just like pressing does for us now.

 

Cleaning is not cool at all. For most, it's as bad as the number of bees you can fit up there.

 

What's that other thing they do--toning? I forget, I thought there was a second type of undetectable restoration.

Artificial toning (AT)! I believe it is detectable the majority of the time, and is noted on the label. Natural toning can often bring a premium such as rainbow and blue toning.

[thirdgreenham]

I forget, did the coinees ever decide whether cleaning is fine? I know it used to put a bee up everybody's butt just like pressing does for us now.

 

Cleaning is not cool at all. For most, it's as bad as the number of bees you can fit up there.

 

What's that other thing they do--toning? I forget, I thought there was a second type of undetectable restoration.

 

There are lots of little tricks that apparently some people do to artificially tone coins.. I've never tried any of that before.

[NewWorldOrder]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[joeypost]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It all comes down to integrity and character. Regardless of the rules many will continue to dance around the issues with a book while others do not need a written set of rules to do whats right.

[nmtg9]

Sellers will never disclose pressing as it may lead to lower prices.

 

They should of course, but they won't.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Sellers will never disclose pressing as it may lead to lower prices.

 

They should of course, but they won't.

 

Perhaps you should actually visit the Marketplace, many of us are doing it already. Some of us have been doing it for years. (thumbs u

[Jeffro.]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

 

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

 

[Jeffro.]

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

It all comes down to integrity and character. Regardless of the rules many will continue to dance around the issues with a book while others do not need a written set of rules to do whats right.

 

There's a whole lotta truth in both of these posts.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

The fact that CGC doesn't recognise it shouldn't play any part. They don't personally sell comics...but they let us do so here. They no longer note date stamps on the label...but we're expected to note them if they're not visible in the scan. And as I said, we already sell thousands of raw books...which isn't exactly their forte?

 

And it's not impossible to enforce...we would simply have to accept that some people would still refuse...either to disclose or to be truthful...but they would do so knowing the risks to their reputation.

 

And there are many ways to prove that a seller has sold a pressed book. There's the obvious one of visible damage being visibly removed (spine roll). Then there's the chain of ownership...seller A sold it to seller B with full disclosure, but seller B tried to sell it here without any disclosure. Then there's the people who have their books pressed for them...certainly the presser will know whether they're being sold with or without honest disclosure.

 

As for anything being 'lost in translation', I'm really not sure what you mean? If you know, disclose. If you don't, say so. I'm not certain what needs translating?

[Flaming_Telepath]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It all comes down to integrity and character. Regardless of the rules many will continue to dance around the issues with a book while others do not need a written set of rules to do whats right.

 

With some people it certainly does, Joey, and if they're lacking in either, why not make it difficult for them?

 

And some people will simply fall in with what the Marketplace demands. They're neither here nor there on the issue, but will go with whatever is asked for.

 

This is not foolproof...very few systems are...but it would be a move towards a more level playing field and greater transparency and openness.

[fantastic_four]

The fact that CGC doesn't recognise it shouldn't play any part.

 

It may not occur to them, although I suspect it will, but requiring that sellers on their chat board disclose a form of restoration that they're unable to detect themselves just calls more attention to the fact that they can't detect it, which some people will forever blame them for.

[Flaming_Telepath]

The fact that CGC doesn't recognise it shouldn't play any part.

 

It may not occur to them, although I suspect it will, but requiring that sellers on their chat board disclose a form of restoration that they're unable to detect themselves just calls more attention to the fact that they can't detect it, which some people will forever blame them for.

 

I think our monthly pressing thread already does that.

[8milemax]

What is funny about this thread is if Arch doesn't agree with discloser and add it to the market rules this "thread-poll" would be all for nothing.

[TupennyConan]

Folks can line-up here & sell free of fees, including free of paypal fees with personal options, 3% surchages as QualityComix did for many months -- for example, checks, money orders, or good old fashioned cash payments.

 

This is the Collector's Society Marketplace under discussion & not eBay, CLink, Heritage, Pedigree, etc.

 

This unique venue creates unique considerations for those who participate herein.

 

To meet the demands of this Marketplace, proactive disclosure should be made compulsory & codified into the Rules.

 

We might not be able to police it fairly or effectively but that is no reason why we should not reduce it to a written Rule.

 

"We will never arrest & prosecute successfully all offenders; therefore, we won't legislate against the offense." That's just silly.

 

No compelling argument can be made for proactive disclosure avoidance by a Seller in this Marketplace (or any other marketplace for that matter).

 

Make it compulsory. Petition Arch today.

 

[comicwiz]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It all comes down to integrity and character. Regardless of the rules many will continue to dance around the issues with a book while others do not need a written set of rules to do whats right.

 

With some people it certainly does, Joey, and if they're lacking in either, why not make it difficult for them?

 

And some people will simply fall in with what the Marketplace demands. They're neither here nor there on the issue, but will go with whatever is asked for.

 

This is not foolproof...very few systems are...but it would be a move towards a more level playing field and greater transparency and openness.

 

 

I see what you're trying to say and do here, and it's noble. But also a little idealistic. The main reasons for doing this are to promote some degree of civility. As others have already said, character and integrity are not things that can be taught or enforced - they are determined by ones actions.

 

There aren't any guarantees things will not denigrate and reach a boiling point even with a policy, however what it does for the board admin's is give them a "hard" or "soft" point of reference. A soft mandate, as you say, is something as simple as a boardie posting the new rules when someone doesn't follow the disclosure protocol.

 

Where it becomes hit and miss is when the seller really doesn't know, a boardie recognizes the book, posts the obligatory "disclosure" policy, and the seller responds in a knee-jerk manner. In such a case (and it happens here far more often than we sometimes would like) it becomes less a situation of a seller lacking the character or integrity, and more about a seller who responds in a visceral way because they don't like being made a fool (either by previous seller, or the brewing hostlity) and the next thing you know, he finds himself in the spotlight as non-disclosing bum.

 

It may take a few meltdowns before the etiquette and proper reactive dynamics take shape and form, and civility prospers. That turbulent period will be tough, but IMHO, without some disclosure policy, the window of opportunity for civility and maturity to meet on the topic will otherwise rapidly close.

[8milemax]

Folks can line-up here & sell free of fees, including free of paypal fees with personal options, 3% surchages as QualityComix did for many months -- for example, checks, money orders, or good old fashioned cash payments.

 

This is the Collector's Society Marketplace under discussion & not eBay, CLink, Heritage, Pedigree, etc.

 

This unique venue creates unique considerations for those who participate herein.

 

To meet the demands of this Marketplace, proactive disclosure should be made compulsory & codified into the Rules.

 

We might not be able to police it fairly or effectively but that is no reason why we should not reduce it to a written Rule.

 

"We will never arrest & prosecute successfully all offenders; therefore, we won't legislate against the offense." That's just silly.

 

No compelling argument can be made for proactive disclosure avoidance by a Seller in this Marketplace (or any other marketplace for that matter).

 

Make it compulsory. Petition Arch today.

 

Lets bother arch and the rest of the MODS! Real smart. Ask them one time and if they say no, so be it. We could get something that none of us wants and CGC decide to close down the market place! That could happen.

[TupennyConan]

Folks can line-up here & sell free of fees, including free of paypal fees with personal options, 3% surchages as QualityComix did for many months -- for example, checks, money orders, or good old fashioned cash payments.

 

This is the Collector's Society Marketplace under discussion & not eBay, CLink, Heritage, Pedigree, etc.

 

This unique venue creates unique considerations for those who participate herein.

 

To meet the demands of this Marketplace, proactive disclosure should be made compulsory & codified into the Rules.

 

We might not be able to police it fairly or effectively but that is no reason why we should not reduce it to a written Rule.

 

"We will never arrest & prosecute successfully all offenders; therefore, we won't legislate against the offense." That's just silly.

 

No compelling argument can be made for proactive disclosure avoidance by a Seller in this Marketplace (or any other marketplace for that matter).

 

Make it compulsory. Petition Arch today.

 

Lets bother arch and the rest of the MODS! Real smart. Ask them one time and if they say no, so be it. We could get something that none of us wants and CGC decide to close down the market place! That could happen.

 

Agreed.

 

Time F_T let this thread go & started a new thread on how to make this happen. Shift the debate to action & away from philosophy.

[joeypost]

I don't think it should be included in the selling rules at all. Proactive disclosure should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

That's fine, Jim. That's always been your take on it. (thumbs u

 

But a vast majority of the board now want more than that, so we're trying to move on to precisely what.

While you're at it, perhaps it can also be mandatory that the price guide entry also be posted for raw books and the GPA information be posted for slabbed books. We wouldn't want anyone having to pay too much or too little for a book posted for sale. It would also be nice to specify the size of scans that can be used to sell a book and whether or not that scan is too light or too dark. We've only hit the tip of the iceberg here. You know, seeing as how people have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, ask questions and are in desperate need of protection.

 

You are now promoted to master of the reductio ad absurdum.

Naturally, but that's how you lose freedoms. They're taken one small step at a time and always in the form of protection. There's rarely any grand sweeping change. It's too noticeable. What people think they want is rarely what they need. Trying to force disclosure is the same as trying to legislate morality. Today it's pressing. Tomorrow it will be something else.

 

Making it mandatory would in effect remove honesty.

 

BTW, has anyone even floated this idea of "mandated Disclosure" by Arch? I would love to hear his viewpoints, as an employee of the parent company, on the matter.

 

No, because we can't yet arrive at precisely what we want out of this.

 

And I'm unsure why Arch/CGC should have a problem with this, if it's done properly? Just because CGC doesn't note pressing, what problem is there with other people doing so?

I mean, we sell raw books by the truckload in the Marketplace?

 

Probably because since CGC does not recognize Comic Book Pressing as a form of restoration then it's would be walking contradiction to make sellers disclose pressing in their very own chats boards.

 

It wouldn't make sense, and it's obviously impossible to enforce.

 

How can anyone really prove a seller has sold a pressed book anyway?

 

There are so many ways it can be lost in translation that it's absurd to even try to prove it.

 

So I think asking Arch to make such an impossible request is pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It all comes down to integrity and character. Regardless of the rules many will continue to dance around the issues with a book while others do not need a written set of rules to do whats right.

 

With some people it certainly does, Joey, and if they're lacking in either, why not make it difficult for them?

 

And some people will simply fall in with what the Marketplace demands. They're neither here nor there on the issue, but will go with whatever is asked for.

 

This is not foolproof...very few systems are...but it would be a move towards a more level playing field and greater transparency and openness.

 

I also think making it mandatory levels out the playing field for good and bad. It's like saying everyone is special, then in effect no one is. Some will only disclose becasue they got caught with their pants down. They are forced. Still does not make them honest.

[chromium]

Folks can line-up here & sell free of fees, including free of paypal fees with personal options,

 

 

The following guidelines are now in effect. Over some period of time these may be modified or expanded.

 

 

9. List acceptable forms of payment (NOTE: Personal PayPal payment is NOT allowed as a listed option in your post as it is not appropriate for item purchases.)