How Do We Achieve Pro-Active Disclosure In The Marketplace?

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think if someone wants to make a proactive disclose list of sellers who disclose about pressing that is fine with me. (thumbs u

 

So what the is your problem? Why all the 'agendas' and 'dictators' BS?

 

It's one of the options on the poll. Vote for it.

 

It really is that simple.

[NewWorldOrder]

All I see again is the people with the same agenda trying to be dictators.

 

I ran a poll. People voted 'yes'.

 

I ran another poll regarding choices, this still being in progress.

 

I think you might need to look 'dictator' up in the dictionary.

 

 

You do know that most boardies that are pro-pressers or view pressing as not restoration do not bother with these kind of threads anyone right?

 

As should I.

 

So if you think your poll is accurate 100% you are smoking crack my friend.

[Flaming_Telepath]

So this alone proves this whole idea a waste of time as if the CGC Mods made this a rule then CGC itself would have to revamp their whole grading standards, hence zero chance.

 

Simply not true. Actually, worse than that...deliberately misleading and designed to create a panic.

 

But you go! (thumbs u

 

Are you not seeing the obvious contraction here?

 

You can't have the company who does not note or view pressing as restoration make people on their very own chat boards make it a mandatory form of disclosure.

 

It makes no sense what so ever.

 

 

It makes every bit of sense.

 

CGC don't note it because they can't detect it.

 

Sellers can note it because they actually had the book pressed themselves.

 

CGC has no knowledge.

 

The seller does have knowledge.

[NewWorldOrder]

I think if someone wants to make a proactive disclose list of sellers who disclose about pressing that is fine with me. (thumbs u

 

So what the is your problem? Why all the 'agendas' and 'dictators' BS?

 

It's one of the options on the poll. Vote for it.

 

It really is that simple.

 

Please Nick you have one agenda and one agenda only on these boards anymore.

 

If you had it your way all your options would be enforced.

[Flaming_Telepath]

All I see again is the people with the same agenda trying to be dictators.

 

I ran a poll. People voted 'yes'.

 

I ran another poll regarding choices, this still being in progress.

 

I think you might need to look 'dictator' up in the dictionary.

 

 

You do know that most boardies that are pro-pressers or view pressing as not restoration do not bother with these kind of threads anyone right?

 

As should I.

 

So if you think your poll is accurate 100% you are smoking crack my friend.

 

You do know that most anti-pressers do not bother with these threads anymore, right?

[comicwiz]

All I see again is the people with the same agenda trying to be dictators.

 

I ran a poll. People voted 'yes'.

 

I ran another poll regarding choices, this still being in progress.

 

I think you might need to look 'dictator' up in the dictionary.

 

 

You do know that most boardies that are pro-pressers or view pressing as not restoration do not bother with these kind of threads anyone right?

 

As should I.

 

So if you think your poll is accurate 100% you are smoking crack my friend.

 

You do know that most anti-pressers do not bother with these threads anymore, right?

 

I'm starting to wonder whether the mods bother either

[Flaming_Telepath]

I think if someone wants to make a proactive disclose list of sellers who disclose about pressing that is fine with me. (thumbs u

 

So what the is your problem? Why all the 'agendas' and 'dictators' BS?

 

It's one of the options on the poll. Vote for it.

 

It really is that simple.

 

Please Nick you have one agenda and one agenda only on these boards anymore.

 

If you had it your way all your options would be enforced.

 

How would you know, John?

 

Met me? Spoken with me?

 

Seen me run any polls with only one choice?

[NewWorldOrder]

So this alone proves this whole idea a waste of time as if the CGC Mods made this a rule then CGC itself would have to revamp their whole grading standards, hence zero chance.

 

Simply not true. Actually, worse than that...deliberately misleading and designed to create a panic.

 

But you go! (thumbs u

 

Are you not seeing the obvious contraction here?

 

You can't have the company who does not note or view pressing as restoration make people on their very own chat boards make it a mandatory form of disclosure.

 

It makes no sense what so ever.

 

 

It makes every bit of sense.

 

CGC don't note it because they can't detect it.

 

Sellers can note it because they actually had the book pressed themselves.

 

CGC has no knowledge.

 

The seller does have knowledge.

 

So CGC should pass on what they can't detect to us and make us enforce what they don't view as resto.

 

[Theagenes]

 

I agree with FD on this. There is a big difference between believing that sellers should disclose (which I agreed with), and actual forcing people to disclose (which I have problems with).

 

I did vote for the third option only, as it seems to be the least onerous. I don't really have a problem with sellers voluntarily adding themselves to a list of people who proactively disclose. That way people who care about pressing can check the list and those who don't care can ignore it.

 

That's fine. I understand your reasoning. (thumbs u

 

If that's the way that sits most comfortably with you and you think it moves us towards a more transparent Marketplace, that's excellent.

 

It's actually a nice little option, that one. It's a positive list and anybody who wants to can get on on it. It 'mandates' nothing. It forces nothing. It 100% gives the choice to the seller.

 

I really am stuck for reasons why the 'we should have freedon to anybody' crowd has so many problems with it?

 

That's exactly right, it's positive, not negative, and that's why I think it's really the only option that's appropriate (if any action at all needs to be taken). It's completely voluntary and on the honor system and doesn't force anyone to participate if they don't want to.

 

And yet it provides buyers who are concerned about pressing the information they need - if a seller isn't on the list, then the buyer needs to be proactive and ask questions. For sellers that do disclose, then they don't need to even think about it if they're selling non-pressed books.

 

And it doesn't take any official approval - just somebody to start a thread in the general marketplace forum.

 

 

 

[FlyingDonut]

All I see again is the people with the same agenda trying to be dictators.

 

I ran a poll. People voted 'yes'.

 

I ran another poll regarding choices, this still being in progress.

 

I think you might need to look 'dictator' up in the dictionary.

 

You ran two polls, one of which is a warm and fuzzy feel good poll, which 74% of the respondents (including me) voted in the affirmative, and the second requiring an enforcement action that was not in any way discussed in the first poll - and you're wondering why people are balking?

[NewWorldOrder]

I think if someone wants to make a proactive disclose list of sellers who disclose about pressing that is fine with me. (thumbs u

 

So what the is your problem? Why all the 'agendas' and 'dictators' BS?

 

It's one of the options on the poll. Vote for it.

 

It really is that simple.

 

Please Nick you have one agenda and one agenda only on these boards anymore.

 

If you had it your way all your options would be enforced.

 

How would you know, John?

 

Met me? Spoken with me?

 

Seen me run any polls with only one choice?

 

Aren't we speaking right now?

 

Nick a lot people here would view all your polls as you want them all enforced, sorry.

 

I think you are a very moral and trustworthy person, but when ever I see you on the boards anymore it's mainly for this topic.

[NewWorldOrder]

All I see again is the people with the same agenda trying to be dictators.

 

I ran a poll. People voted 'yes'.

 

I ran another poll regarding choices, this still being in progress.

 

I think you might need to look 'dictator' up in the dictionary.

 

You ran two polls, one of which is a warm and fuzzy feel good poll, which 74% of the respondents (including me) voted in the affirmative, and the second requiring an enforcement action that was not in any way discussed in the first poll - and you're wondering why people are balking?

 

Correct Sir.

[Cimm]

I voted these two

 

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

 

(3) The maintenance of a 'Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who actively disclose in all of their sales thread.

 

Me too (thumbs u

[Bosco685]

balking

[FlyingDonut]

I voted these two

 

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

 

(3) The maintenance of a 'Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who actively disclose in all of their sales thread.

 

Me too (thumbs u

 

OK, for those who voted for either of these, what happens to the person, who when asked nicely to identify the books that have been pressed, says, "screw off", or "assume that all these books are pressed"?

 

Steve Borock's "assume all these books are pressed" answers both of these statements, but says nothing.

[FlyingDonut]

balking

 

Please. Lets keep this reality based. The Mets wouldn't be scoring with Carlos Delgado in the batter's box.

[Bosco685]

[Mac Man]

Just my two cents here but here goes...

 

(1) Request that Arch includes pro-active disclosure in the Marketplace rules with the standard actions/sanctions being the consequence of non-adherence.

Won't happen. Arch and the rest of admin have been VERY clear that they do not run the marketplace and simply delete threads not in compliance with the rules. Because CGC Inc. hasn't taken a stance on pressing, I don't think they're going to even touch the issue in the marketplace.

 

Frankly, we're lucky they let us play here... I don't think we want to make more work for them as it'd just be easier to shut the place down.

 

 

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

Seems viable as it's simply a request asking someone to do something--but not forcing them to comply. But no need to have a poll on it as it's no different at this point than asking for a scan or clarification of a part of a book (is that a NCB or a scanner streak?).

 

(3) The maintenance of a 'Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who actively disclose in all of their sales thread.

Seems superfluous if the people are already disclosing in their sales threads :shrug:

(4) The maintenance of a 'Non-Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who make no effort to pro-actively disclose in their sales thread.

I agree with Sha on this one. I'd want NO part of a black ball list of this sort. The probation list is something altogether different, but there is rule breaking (Probation list) and then bad form (non-disclosure).

 

[Mac Man]

I voted these two

 

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

 

(3) The maintenance of a 'Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who actively disclose in all of their sales thread.

 

Me too (thumbs u

 

OK, for those who voted for either of these, what happens to the person, who when asked nicely to identify the books that have been pressed, says, "screw off", or "assume that all these books are pressed"?

 

Steve Borock's "assume all these books are pressed" answers both of these statements, but says nothing.

 

Dan, referencing #2 at least, I'd say that the issue is done then no different than if I asked you for a scan and you told me to bugger off. Was that particularly respectful? No, but it's your call. Might it affect sales if others see you as unwilling to disclose? Maybe, maybe not.

 

(not that you'd do that OF COURSE!)

[Bosco685]

Seems viable as it's simply a request asking someone to do something--but not forcing them to comply. But no need to have a poll on it as it's no different at this point than asking for a scan or clarification of a part of a book (is that a NCB or a scanner streak?).

Today, if someone posted in a sales thread, "Are any of these books pressed," wouldn't it be perceived as thread carping?