So if you criticize ComicLink...

[Columbia Comics]

tottally agree with you. there was some great dialogue regarding issues that seemed to always come back to the system technology. The 2 issues I was totally shocked with is the cheap shot to boardies and what seemed like a breech of client privacy. If that is their business model, so be it. I hope it has at least opened the eyes of some board members to realize there are other venues to explore selling/buying comics.

 

Currently in the process of exploring those possibilities...perhaps a competitor??

[whomerjay]

Not surprising at all. The fact that he took a cheap shot at boardies and not sure if he broke any privacy laws in discussing who bid and who did not bid etc.

 

I was one of those boardies...as was Charlie.

 

I'm glad in a way that those who were able to read the the thread before it was pulled got a glimpse into the real Josh!!!!!

 

I think this will be the last time I do business with them.

 

Why not apply the same principle and logic to CGC and the boards and stop doing business with them?

 

I want to make sure I understand what you are saying, that because you elect not to do business with an advitser in this case comiclink that you should stop doing business with all board members.??

 

Well obviously CGC is complicit with CL's "unethical moneygrab" here, part of the conspiracy to keep you down, so why not punish them as well and take your business elsewhere?

[Wally's Comics]

It's amazing how money sweeps injustice under the rug...

 

 

 

 

 

 

[skypinkblu]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

[Columbia Comics]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

 

Send me a PM Sharon...

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Apparently that is another line not to be crossed.

 

I guess since CL advertises here, they have immunity?? :shrug:

 

Basically. Just like Metropolis and Heritage. All of them have had no-so-nice things written about them removed and erased over the years.

 

Its a sponsored Internet Forum, not the Washington Post. It runs on money paid for by advertisers, not on Unicron Farts and Pixie Dust. The 1st Ammendment doesn't apply here.

 

I would not say "basically".

 

I imagine the mods of these boards look at threads that are full of unfounded statements or analysis and threats to sue as not productive, not healthy for the site, not healthy for CGC, and decide for various reasons including risk management that they should be pulled.

 

Had the thread been a constructive analysis of the situation, instead of an open invitation to dump on CL for any current or past transgression, with less venom and threats of legal action, it probably would have stayed.

 

Respectfully, there have been far worse threads with a far greater shelf-life. The content seemed pretty tame to me when I read through it.

[Dr. Balls]

I love me some good Friday conspiracy discussion. I think Comic Link is a patsy for CGC to misdirect us from talking about the real issue at hand: CGC is secretly CVA, and they are using Exceptional Labels to hide microchips in our comic books.

[campued1010]

Not surprising at all. The fact that he took a cheap shot at boardies and not sure if he broke any privacy laws in discussing who bid and who did not bid etc.

 

I was one of those boardies...as was Charlie.

 

I'm glad in a way that those who were able to read the the thread before it was pulled got a glimpse into the real Josh!!!!!

 

I think this will be the last time I do business with them.

 

Why not apply the same principle and logic to CGC and the boards and stop doing business with them?

 

I want to make sure I understand what you are saying, that because you elect not to do business with an advitser in this case comiclink that you should stop doing business with all board members.??

 

Well obviously CGC is complicit with CL's "unethical moneygrab" here, part of the conspiracy to keep you down, so why not punish them as well and take your business elsewhere?

 

Boardies made some good suggestions and as the situation occurred in the past people had a right to be upset. I do understand what you are trying to say. from my point of view CGC is providing a free service to boardies, we have access to great people in the hobby where you can buy and sell. If they were profiting from by buying and selling then I would have to consider their position on pulling the thread. As advertising is an income stream I understand that the need to make a discision, but I don't think the thread was pulled because of of issues brought up. I believe someone was to quick on the trigger last night, wrote some things that could subject themselves to legal action let alone insulting boardies.

 

I compare this to TV, I'm not going to stop watching a particular show/ station because I happen to dislike or disagree with one of the sponsors.

[whomerjay]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

 

CL came on (a mistake IMO) and refuted that what they were doing was unethical as some posters stated, that they were trying to be fair.

 

A few pages later, after repeated attacks on the same topic and others (website, how Josh is evil), they came back and called out of couple of people beeotchin as ones who hadn't participated in the auction anyway or ahd even ever bought or sold on CL. Again, I didn't think this wise. But to paint the problem with the thread being CL's attack on boardies is absurd.

 

I have no incentive to defend CL, I'm calling this as I see it. Because for some reason I had some free time last night and this AM, and made the mistake of checking CG.

[Wally's Comics]

I love me some good Friday conspiracy discussion. I think Comic Link is a patsy for CGC to misdirect us from talking about the real issue at hand: CGC is secretly CVA, and they are using Exceptional Labels to hide microchips in our comic books.

 

my tin foil hat is ON!!!!!

 

 

 

[Fedoraman]

 

Its...not the Washington Post.

 

That is one -poor example.

[Transplant]

No conflicts of interest. No preferential treatment for advertisers. Nope. Nothing to see here. Move along.

[miraclemet]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

 

CL came on (a mistake IMO) and refuted that what they were doing was unethical as some posters stated, that they were trying to be fair.

 

A few pages later, after repeated attacks on the same topic and others (website, how Josh is evil), they came back and called out of couple of people beeotchin as ones who hadn't participated in the auction anyway or ahd even ever bought or sold on CL. Again, I didn't think this wise. But to paint the problem with the thread being CL's attack on boardies is absurd.

 

I have no incentive to defend CL, I'm calling this as I see it. Because for some reason I had some free time last night and this AM, and made the mistake of checking CG.

 

Just to be clear, my 'beeotchin' was in two areas:

1. The incongruity between the loss of service and how CLink decided to fix it.

2. The lack of coverage in the company's stated terms and conditions regarding what would be done in these types of service outages (i.e. Service Level Agreements).

 

[there wer others who took to complaining about other non-relevant CLink concerns, and did add to the general CLink piling on, but they were nothing new]

 

and comiclink's "calling me out" was to post my non-published first name (not listed here on my site profile) and to post my buying history (or lack there-of) with their site. He also posted another members bidding results specific to the re-opened auctions. All of this could be construed as disclosing customer information, which is counter to their stated Privacy Policy posted here..

 

just calling me out would have been comiclink saying "if you can do it better, feel free!" or "I dont see you running a multi-million dollar auction house so shut it" and while being unclassy, wouldnt have been counter to their Privacy Policy.

 

The intellectual exercise of assessing the situation and trying to rationalize a fair countermeasure is fun for me. I work in Project Management, I work in the word of Problem/Countermeasures so I like to spend some cycles on these things, its what I do.

[Transplant]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

 

CL came on (a mistake IMO) and refuted that what they were doing was unethical as some posters stated, that they were trying to be fair.

 

A few pages later, after repeated attacks on the same topic and others (website, how Josh is evil), they came back and called out of couple of people beeotchin as ones who hadn't participated in the auction anyway or ahd even ever bought or sold on CL. Again, I didn't think this wise. But to paint the problem with the thread being CL's attack on boardies is absurd.

 

I have no incentive to defend CL, I'm calling this as I see it. Because for some reason I had some free time last night and this AM, and made the mistake of checking CG.

 

Basically, Josh said that the complainers on the board aren't customers anyway and that CL didn't care about what they had to say. Which is funny, I complain about them and have sold several thousand dollars worth of books and bought books as well.

[whomerjay]

I read the thread last night, all I saw was something about the auction being extended? Where was the boardie bashing?

 

Were names actually used? If so, I'm going to have to think about not bidding there as well.

 

CL came on (a mistake IMO) and refuted that what they were doing was unethical as some posters stated, that they were trying to be fair.

 

A few pages later, after repeated attacks on the same topic and others (website, how Josh is evil), they came back and called out of couple of people beeotchin as ones who hadn't participated in the auction anyway or ahd even ever bought or sold on CL. Again, I didn't think this wise. But to paint the problem with the thread being CL's attack on boardies is absurd.

 

I have no incentive to defend CL, I'm calling this as I see it. Because for some reason I had some free time last night and this AM, and made the mistake of checking CG.

 

Just to be clear, my 'beeotchin' was in two areas:

1. The incongruity between the loss of service and how CLink decided to fix it.

2. The lack of coverage in the company's stated terms and conditions regarding what would be done in these types of service outages (i.e. Service Level Agreements).

 

[there wer others who took to complaining about other non-relevant CLink concerns, and did add to the general CLink piling on, but they were nothing new]

 

and comiclink's "calling me out" was to post my non-published first name (not listed here on my site profile) and to post my buying history (or lack there-of) with their site. He also posted another members bidding results specific to the re-opened auctions. All of this could be construed as disclosing customer information, which is counter to their stated Privacy Policy posted here..

 

just calling me out would have been comiclink saying "if you can do it better, feel free!" or "I dont see you running a multi-million dollar auction house so shut it" and while being unclassy, wouldnt have been counter to their Privacy Policy.

 

The intellectual exercise of assessing the situation and trying to rationalize a fair countermeasure is fun for me. I work in Project Management, I work in the word of Problem/Countermeasures so I like to spend some cycles on these things, its what I do.

 

I never considered this at the time but you have an argument. It was also unclear to me to whom they were referring.

 

In the scheme of things, although possibly an actionable offense, I find it foolish but not egregious, and I'd guess (not being a lawyer) unlikely to be pursued legally. And lastly understandable, when you (or someone, not sure it was you) call someone unethical on a chatboard they advertise on, they may not respond intelligently.

 

 

[lscomics]

from my point of view CGC is providing a free service to boardies, we have access to great people in the hobby where you can buy and sell.

Anymore I view the boards being free as partial compensation for the pathetically slow TATs.

[skypinkblu]

I didn't bid on this auction because I was not happy about their accepted payments. I won a book, wanted it quickly (because I was going to be traveling) and was willing to pay the extra 3%.. They don't take Amex, or PP and basically (except for dept store cards) those are they only two credit card methods I use anymore. So, I had to send a check to a "dropbox" in Chicago, even though that is not where their business is...and then I had to wait for the check to "clear"...even though it was a bank check, sent by my bank, and the funds were removed from my account at the time the check was sent. Note this was not the first time I've purchased from them.

 

I was not really happy about the whole rigmarole so I didn't bid this month...but I'd be really upset if someone posted my name and mentioned ANY of my bids...it's just not customer friendly (either is the whole payment thing).

[Hibou]

Not surprising at all. The fact that he took a cheap shot at boardies and not sure if he broke any privacy laws in discussing who bid and who did not bid etc.

 

I was one of those boardies...as was Charlie.

 

I'm glad in a way that those who were able to read the the thread before it was pulled got a glimpse into the real Josh!!!!!

 

I think this will be the last time I do business with them.

 

I was a little shocked to see that information disclosed...

 

Makes me wonder about something else.

 

 

[vader2001]

I have never bid on Clink. I would have liked to have read that thread. I have been to that site many times. It might have shown their true character.

 

 

Darn football game!

[Mark 1]

I've never bought from them and now....probably won't.