A response from a CGC IT! ebay seller!

[Ogami]

 

 

Perhaps you've never heard of honey?

[8milemax]

Wow! I seen that this topic had 45 new post and I thought an interesting discussion was going on. I was wrong, RMA had 3/4 of the new post with his Gremlins and pictures.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Wow! I seen that this topic had 45 new post and I thought an interesting discussion was going on. I was wrong, RMA had 3/4 of the new post with his Gremlins and pictures.

 

[Jeffro.]

More graemlins and pictures please

[Underground44]

CGC it has something to do with a listing of a comic book. That is the reason why I don´t see it as spam.

Using that reasoning, you could put ANY word with a slight connection to your listed item, no matter what the relevance. I think eBay's policies, which I posted at length, are very clear that a distant possible connection is not adequate as a justification.

 

Its a comic book listing, CGC grades comic books. The book is ungraded, one´s saying to get it graded.

Yeah, we understand that's the rationale. But the seller's job is not to tell people (or suggest to people) what to do after they potentially purchase an item. The seller's job is to accurately describe the item, period. Offering a suggestion of something they might do after they buy the item is completely outside the responsibility of the seller --ESPECIALLY if that suggestion is a form of keyword spamming. eBay's policies make this clear.

 

Do you dispute that this is eBay's policy? Let me ask you that again: Do you dispute that eBay has a policy against spamming keywords that do not directly describe the item being listed? Let me ask you one more time: Are you actually disputing that eBay's policy is eBay's policy?

 

Now, let me put this another way: Would you be convinced if an eBay representative specifically addressed this situation and definitively affirmed that no, "CGC it" is not within eBay's listing guidelines? Yes or no?

 

If it´s from serious dealer + good grader it might actually be of interest to people who collect CGC books to get that particular one and get it graded.

This is a rationalization. Why rationalize keyword spamming? But let's put this to the test: Let's take a board survey of how many eBay browsers out there, when seeking high-grade books they'd like to eventually submit to CGC, do searches for "CGC it" in hopes of finding high-grade books. Anybody search eBay this way? Bueller? Bueller?

 

If a browser wants to find high-grade books, that person has many options for search terms: "high grade," "near mint," "very fine," "like new," etc. Those would all be better search terms than "CGC it" because, let's be honest, most reputable sellers who are offering high-grade comics do not put "CGC it" in their listings.

 

Your rationalization also fails to acknowledge the net negative of the spam keyword. You say that "CGC it" might help people find high-grade raw books. But what about all the people who are trying to find CGC-graded books who then get search results that are opposite to what they're seeking? Do they not count in your analysis? You claim a benefit while ignoring the obvious flipside.

 

Who am I to decide that a particular listing or book is not CGC worthy or should not be graded?

This question is irrelevant since the judgment of individual books is secondary to the larger question of appropriate listing terms. The primary question is whether "CGC it" violates eBay's listing guidelines and their rules against keyword spamming. It has been well-demonstrated that yes, "CGC it" does violate their guidelines.

 

And who am I to decide what is of interest to people searching on Ebay?

Again, it's not about you, it's about eBay's policies and the logical reasons behind their policies. But I would wager that if you were to do a statistical analysis of individual search patterns, or a survey of what comic-book browsers prefer, you'd discover that a hard majority of people prefer not to be burdened with keyword spamming and other distractions that dilute the effectiveness of their search terms. People searching for "Nike" don't want to get results that say "Adidas not Nike," or "Just like Nike." They want to get results full of actual Nikes.

 

Apparently it bothers some people while looking for only CGC graded books. A very simple solution was given here by Doohickamabob before to avoid it.

Yes, I did give a solution, but it's not necessarily "very simple." It involves having to post a long chain of Booleans in each and every search that a person does. The average person searching on eBay only has a fleeting grasp of Boolean search terms and would have to spend time tinkering around with them to finally weed out all the false positives for CGC searches. Whether or not my solution works, the point is that people shouldn't have to jump through hoops to avoid keyword spamming to begin with. Somebody letting their dog take a dump on your lawn day after day is also easily dealt with by cleaning up the dog-doo, but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.

 

I´m not saying that its the rationale from all sellers, but apparently, the one that responded the OP, had something like that in mind.

Don't you think the rationale for most sellers is for their item to show up even when people aren't searching for it? Just in hopes of getting a few more eyeballs on their stuff and hopefully selling it? That's obviously the rationale. And.....drum roll....that's keyword spamming. Which.....drum roll.....is clearly against eBay policy. Are you really going to dispute that it's keyword spamming, and are you really going to dispute that it's against eBay policy?

 

The idea that a seller puts "CGC it" in his listing title to "help" people find high-graded books is ludicrous. I mean, you reaaaaalllly have to stretch common sense to make a claim that the seller is trying to be helpful. And note that the OP's example demonstrates clearly that the seller wasn't helping people at all, since he had listed a couple hundred raw books with "CGC it" in the title and a significant portion of them weren't even close to high-grade. So your claim that "CGC it" might help people find CGC-worthy books is demonstrably false, if this example is any indication.

 

Is it true that its CGC worthy? It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Is the CGC it put there for hits? Yes, but It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Why is it irrelevant to the point you're trying to make? What point are you trying to make, anyway? You haven't made much of a point at all, other than repeating the same rationalizations in new ways and ignoring the central issue of how "keyword spamming" is defined (quite clearly, and repeatedly, in eBay's seller pages) and what eBay's policy is about it (it's strongly against it).

 

Which is: It is not misusing the brand and if you look at it the way I do, its not spamming.

"If you look at it the way I do" is the problem in this sentence. You haven't given logical reasons for why you look at it the way you do. Mostly what you've stated is that you choose to blatantly ignore the definition of "keyword spamming" and you choose to blatantly ignore the question of what eBay's policy is. How else are you looking at it, if not that way?

 

In fact, since I have no invested interests in either case, my answer was as unemotional and rational as it comes.

Being uninvested in something does not guarantee that one will be rational about it. Sometimes distance from a subject even feeds into someone's ignorance. I'm not "emotional" about the subject but I do have a first-hand knowledge of what a problem it is when you're trying to find something specific and sellers use keyword spam to cheat their way into your search results. It's a net negative because you end up spending 10 minutes to find something would take 5 minutes if people weren't selfishly throwing false positives in your way. If I search for "Superman" I don't want to find a bunch of "Green Lantern" comics, I want to find "Superman." If I search for "CGC" I don't want to find a bunch of raw comics that the seller thinks look nice, I want to find CGC-graded comics. Etc.

 

You don´t agree with my reasoning and I don´t agree with yours.

This symmetry does not mean both viewpoints are equally valid. The comparison point for arguments is determined by the strength of the reasoning within each individual argument. I have directly responded to and rebuted your arguments, while you keep ignoring the basic thrust of mine, which is that (1) "CGC it" falls well within the definition of "keyword spamming", in spite of unsupported rationalizations and flimsy speculation to the contrary, and (2) eBay has a very clear policy against keyword spamming.

 

A comic book is not an "accessory" to CGC, it's the primary product being sold.

This is incorrect. CGC does not sell books, they sell grades (and graders notes). Buy the book, then the grade is the moto

You just said "this is incorrect" and then you gave no explanation for why it is incorrect. Your statement that "CGC does not sell books, they sell grades" in no way contradicts my statement that the "comic book....it the primary product being sold" in an eBay listing for a raw comic book.

Which brings me to second point, the one with the juice: numerical grades grades in raw books.

This point has no "juice" because it has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether or not "CGC it" is keyword spamming that violates eBay's policy. How does the existence of one abusive practice negate the existence of another, unrelated abusive practice?

 

Is it true that its a 9.8? ... Does this clutters a lot more listings than all CGC it combined? Yes, just the 9.8 is enough.

In what way does this make "CGC it" any less a form of keyword spamming? I'll answer that for you: It doesn't.

 

Now, having said all of that, here are some flowers:

 

I was having to scroll left to right to read the thread, so when I got to this one, I thought RMA surely must be posting again.

 

 

Seriously does anyone actually read replies this long? There's wars going on in the world somewhere.

[RockMyAmadeus]

More graemlins and pictures please

 

[skypinkblu]

L@@K!

 

That's my pet peeve, I skip those...

[Racer-X]

CGC it has something to do with a listing of a comic book. That is the reason why I don´t see it as spam.

Using that reasoning, you could put ANY word with a slight connection to your listed item, no matter what the relevance. I think eBay's policies, which I posted at length, are very clear that a distant possible connection is not adequate as a justification.

 

Its a comic book listing, CGC grades comic books. The book is ungraded, one´s saying to get it graded.

Yeah, we understand that's the rationale. But the seller's job is not to tell people (or suggest to people) what to do after they potentially purchase an item. The seller's job is to accurately describe the item, period. Offering a suggestion of something they might do after they buy the item is completely outside the responsibility of the seller --ESPECIALLY if that suggestion is a form of keyword spamming. eBay's policies make this clear.

 

Do you dispute that this is eBay's policy? Let me ask you that again: Do you dispute that eBay has a policy against spamming keywords that do not directly describe the item being listed? Let me ask you one more time: Are you actually disputing that eBay's policy is eBay's policy?

 

Now, let me put this another way: Would you be convinced if an eBay representative specifically addressed this situation and definitively affirmed that no, "CGC it" is not within eBay's listing guidelines? Yes or no?

 

If it´s from serious dealer + good grader it might actually be of interest to people who collect CGC books to get that particular one and get it graded.

This is a rationalization. Why rationalize keyword spamming? But let's put this to the test: Let's take a board survey of how many eBay browsers out there, when seeking high-grade books they'd like to eventually submit to CGC, do searches for "CGC it" in hopes of finding high-grade books. Anybody search eBay this way? Bueller? Bueller?

 

If a browser wants to find high-grade books, that person has many options for search terms: "high grade," "near mint," "very fine," "like new," etc. Those would all be better search terms than "CGC it" because, let's be honest, most reputable sellers who are offering high-grade comics do not put "CGC it" in their listings.

 

Your rationalization also fails to acknowledge the net negative of the spam keyword. You say that "CGC it" might help people find high-grade raw books. But what about all the people who are trying to find CGC-graded books who then get search results that are opposite to what they're seeking? Do they not count in your analysis? You claim a benefit while ignoring the obvious flipside.

 

Who am I to decide that a particular listing or book is not CGC worthy or should not be graded?

This question is irrelevant since the judgment of individual books is secondary to the larger question of appropriate listing terms. The primary question is whether "CGC it" violates eBay's listing guidelines and their rules against keyword spamming. It has been well-demonstrated that yes, "CGC it" does violate their guidelines.

 

And who am I to decide what is of interest to people searching on Ebay?

Again, it's not about you, it's about eBay's policies and the logical reasons behind their policies. But I would wager that if you were to do a statistical analysis of individual search patterns, or a survey of what comic-book browsers prefer, you'd discover that a hard majority of people prefer not to be burdened with keyword spamming and other distractions that dilute the effectiveness of their search terms. People searching for "Nike" don't want to get results that say "Adidas not Nike," or "Just like Nike." They want to get results full of actual Nikes.

 

Apparently it bothers some people while looking for only CGC graded books. A very simple solution was given here by Doohickamabob before to avoid it.

Yes, I did give a solution, but it's not necessarily "very simple." It involves having to post a long chain of Booleans in each and every search that a person does. The average person searching on eBay only has a fleeting grasp of Boolean search terms and would have to spend time tinkering around with them to finally weed out all the false positives for CGC searches. Whether or not my solution works, the point is that people shouldn't have to jump through hoops to avoid keyword spamming to begin with. Somebody letting their dog take a dump on your lawn day after day is also easily dealt with by cleaning up the dog-doo, but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.

 

I´m not saying that its the rationale from all sellers, but apparently, the one that responded the OP, had something like that in mind.

Don't you think the rationale for most sellers is for their item to show up even when people aren't searching for it? Just in hopes of getting a few more eyeballs on their stuff and hopefully selling it? That's obviously the rationale. And.....drum roll....that's keyword spamming. Which.....drum roll.....is clearly against eBay policy. Are you really going to dispute that it's keyword spamming, and are you really going to dispute that it's against eBay policy?

 

The idea that a seller puts "CGC it" in his listing title to "help" people find high-graded books is ludicrous. I mean, you reaaaaalllly have to stretch common sense to make a claim that the seller is trying to be helpful. And note that the OP's example demonstrates clearly that the seller wasn't helping people at all, since he had listed a couple hundred raw books with "CGC it" in the title and a significant portion of them weren't even close to high-grade. So your claim that "CGC it" might help people find CGC-worthy books is demonstrably false, if this example is any indication.

 

Is it true that its CGC worthy? It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Is the CGC it put there for hits? Yes, but It´s irrelevant for the point I am trying to make.

Why is it irrelevant to the point you're trying to make? What point are you trying to make, anyway? You haven't made much of a point at all, other than repeating the same rationalizations in new ways and ignoring the central issue of how "keyword spamming" is defined (quite clearly, and repeatedly, in eBay's seller pages) and what eBay's policy is about it (it's strongly against it).

 

Which is: It is not misusing the brand and if you look at it the way I do, its not spamming.

"If you look at it the way I do" is the problem in this sentence. You haven't given logical reasons for why you look at it the way you do. Mostly what you've stated is that you choose to blatantly ignore the definition of "keyword spamming" and you choose to blatantly ignore the question of what eBay's policy is. How else are you looking at it, if not that way?

 

In fact, since I have no invested interests in either case, my answer was as unemotional and rational as it comes.

Being uninvested in something does not guarantee that one will be rational about it. Sometimes distance from a subject even feeds into someone's ignorance. I'm not "emotional" about the subject but I do have a first-hand knowledge of what a problem it is when you're trying to find something specific and sellers use keyword spam to cheat their way into your search results. It's a net negative because you end up spending 10 minutes to find something would take 5 minutes if people weren't selfishly throwing false positives in your way. If I search for "Superman" I don't want to find a bunch of "Green Lantern" comics, I want to find "Superman." If I search for "CGC" I don't want to find a bunch of raw comics that the seller thinks look nice, I want to find CGC-graded comics. Etc.

 

You don´t agree with my reasoning and I don´t agree with yours.

This symmetry does not mean both viewpoints are equally valid. The comparison point for arguments is determined by the strength of the reasoning within each individual argument. I have directly responded to and rebuted your arguments, while you keep ignoring the basic thrust of mine, which is that (1) "CGC it" falls well within the definition of "keyword spamming", in spite of unsupported rationalizations and flimsy speculation to the contrary, and (2) eBay has a very clear policy against keyword spamming.

 

A comic book is not an "accessory" to CGC, it's the primary product being sold.

This is incorrect. CGC does not sell books, they sell grades (and graders notes). Buy the book, then the grade is the moto

You just said "this is incorrect" and then you gave no explanation for why it is incorrect. Your statement that "CGC does not sell books, they sell grades" in no way contradicts my statement that the "comic book....it the primary product being sold" in an eBay listing for a raw comic book.

Which brings me to second point, the one with the juice: numerical grades grades in raw books.

This point has no "juice" because it has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether or not "CGC it" is keyword spamming that violates eBay's policy. How does the existence of one abusive practice negate the existence of another, unrelated abusive practice?

 

Is it true that its a 9.8? ... Does this clutters a lot more listings than all CGC it combined? Yes, just the 9.8 is enough.

In what way does this make "CGC it" any less a form of keyword spamming? I'll answer that for you: It doesn't.

 

Now, having said all of that, here are some flowers:

 

I was having to scroll left to right to read the thread, so when I got to this one, I thought RMA surely must be posting again.

 

 

Seriously does anyone actually read replies this long? There's wars going on in the world somewhere.

 

I read this one and then saw that 2 wars started and 3 ended...

[miraclemet]

Who would have thought 20 pages ago my little post would still be going. Cant decide between pride and horror... I'm going with both.

 

at the end of the day my problem with the whole topic is the subjectivity.

 

1. Adding CGC to an auction title not including a CGC book is keyword spamming (is there a bigger key word in high grade comic collecting? ok maybe NM)

 

2. You can create big search tricks to get rid of some, but not the ones that just decide to throw "CGC" in raw book listings.

 

And here's where it gets grey (and thus how we end up with 20 pages)

 

3. There are some raw books that it makes sense to market to the high grade slabbing crowd. Books worth hundred or thousands of dollars raw are in the wheelhouse of those who collect CGC books. Super hot books like Walking Dead, or Chew in high grade are worth marketing to the CGC crowd, and you'll likely get action from those types of buyers, so I get that rationale and think its honest (you are trying to get a book in front of the eyes of the type of viewers who you honestly think would be interested in it).

 

4. BUT there are tons more books that are not worth CGCing that get pimped with the CGC keyword spam and when the seller suggest that the $10 mid-grade late 70s Legion of Super Heroes book is "CGC worthy" or just "CGC" then I get annoyed. Its not. It shouldn't be. It makes no sense to spend the money to have a mid grade, common book professionally graded and encapsulated. Yes there are exceptions (and I'm not gonna fault anyone for having anything CGCed), but these sellers aren't honestly trying to get their book in front of the right high grade buyers. They just see what the top search words are, and add them. Sometimes with the flimsiest of logic (Not CGC'ed!... uh we know we can see the picture) sometimes with no logic at all....

 

I have all these same problems with people that have titles that include "not NM" and "Not Avengers" and every other key word abuse.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Strangely enough, it has never bothered me personally that people use "CGC" or "CGC it" in eBay listings.

 

I think your points (Miraclemet) especially #3 and #4 are really at the heart of what people are arguing over.

 

All in all, another thing that I wouldn't even have noticed if I hadn't read it on here. Much like miswraps, the only reason this is even on my radar now is because I read about it on here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dr. Balls]

Someone needs to invent a new word for what 'CGC it' is in Ebay listings. It's not keyword spamming. Spamming is using unrelated words to manipulate results. It's like keyword spamming, but slightly different.

 

I'm going to nominate the phrase 'keyword corned beefing' which retains it's nasty canned food reference while maintaining a similar colloquialism as the misinterpreted definition.

[miraclemet]

Someone needs to invent a new word for what 'CGC it' is in Ebay listings. It's not keyword spamming. Spamming is using unrelated words to manipulate results. It's like keyword spamming, but slightly different.

 

I'm going to nominate the phrase 'keyword corned beefing' which retains it's nasty canned food reference while maintaining a similar colloquialism as the misinterpreted definition.

 

+1 (thumbs u

 

[comicdonna]

Canned corned beef is nasty? This means war.

 

 

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

This thread is silly.

 

Therefore, I must contribute.

 

I buy a lot of raw books on eBay, as well as graded. When I'm looking for raw books I add "-CGC" to the search. So listings from sellers who use the "CGC IT" spam technique are invisible to me. It's ironic that the spam technique these sellers employ to increase visibility on raw books actually decreases visibility to their target buyer and increases visibility to those who aren't interested in their product.

 

Based on the above, I would argue that in the long run market forces punish sellers who use this spam technique and reward those who don't. So do not despair, given enough time, evolution will remove the "CGC IT" spammer from the human population.

 

[VintageComics]

I buy a lot of raw books on eBay, as well as graded. When I'm looking for raw books I add "-CGC" to the search. So listings from sellers who use the "CGC IT" spam technique are invisible to me. It's ironic that the spam technique these sellers employ to increase visibility on raw books actually decreases visibility to their target buyer and increases visibility to those who aren't interested in their product.

 

Consequently, you could also add -"CGC it"

 

(thumbs u

 

The beauty of modern technology.

 

[Racer-X]

is no one else adding hot secretaries here? that's really the only reason I stayed tuned. but, what's this thing about "CGC-it?"

 

[Dr. Balls]

is no one else adding hot secretaries here? that's really the only reason I stayed tuned. but, what's this thing about "CGC-it?"

 

Using the phrase 'CGC it' in your Ebay listing is considered keyword corned beefing, and is currently acceptable under Ebay's guidelines. I have been speaking with a secretary trying to get her to add the phrase 'keyword corned beefing' into their documents. I believe she looks like this:

 

 

[Racer-X]

is no one else adding hot secretaries here? that's really the only reason I stayed tuned. but, what's this thing about "CGC-it?"

 

Using the phrase 'CGC it' in your Ebay listing is considered keyword corned beefing, and is currently acceptable under Ebay's guidelines. I have been speaking with a secretary trying to get her to add the phrase 'keyword corned beefing' into their documents. I believe she looks like this:

 

 

aaaah. that's more like it. now if only your hot secretary were holding a can of corned beef. mmmmm...

[Jeffro.]

is no one else adding hot secretaries here? that's really the only reason I stayed tuned. but, what's this thing about "CGC-it?"

 

Too prurient

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

I buy a lot of raw books on eBay, as well as graded. When I'm looking for raw books I add "-CGC" to the search. So listings from sellers who use the "CGC IT" spam technique are invisible to me. It's ironic that the spam technique these sellers employ to increase visibility on raw books actually decreases visibility to their target buyer and increases visibility to those who aren't interested in their product.

 

Consequently, you could also add -"CGC it"

 

(thumbs u

 

The beauty of modern technology.

 

 

Yes. When searching for graded comics I add -"CGC IT" and -"CGC Worthy" to the parameters. This Boolean logic is easily stored in "Saved Searches" so it only has to be entered once.

 

Natural selection favors the intelligent searcher and punishes the spammer. Therefore, in several hundred generations, the gene pool will be strengthened and threads like this will vanish.

 

I maintain, as always, that the future is bright for the organisphere here on planet Earth.