General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Comicopolis]

Who are the five nitwits that have voted, "no"?

 

[DrWatson]

I need to amend it to seven.

[skypinkblu]

just surprised that it was phil who did this....

 

I didn't want to get into the history, because he always seems to be very pleasant, but I know that this has happened with HIM, on at least 2 prior occasions, might have been 3. I know I PMed him previously, on two different threads and another friend PMed him at least once. Just don't know if our PMs were overlapping. The first time, he said he "didn't know it was a problem" the 2nd time, he "forgot".

 

Some people are here, to sell books, period.

[User 01001010]

just surprised that it was phil who did this....

 

I didn't want to get into the history, because he always seems to be very pleasant, but I know that this has happened with HIM, on at least 2 prior occasions, might have been 3. I know I PMed him previously, on two different threads and another friend PMed him at least once. Just don't know if our PMs were overlapping. The first time, he said he "didn't know it was a problem" the 2nd time, he "forgot".

 

Some people are here, to sell books, period.

 

 

true, hopefully i will never fall into that category of just selling books to sell them. i'm not that hard up to skirt the rules just to make a buck....

 

i didn't know this was possibly his 3rd time doing it.

 

huh...

[Bosco685]

I don't think it's a problem for you to deal with him, but not on the boards...

 

 

 

I would like for us to petition Arch to follow Jim's suggestion. Anyone who sells a graded book, in a case, must show the label.

 

Does anyone object?

 

Would a poll be better than just asking?

(thumbs u

 

I think that either the label should be shown or declaring that the book is CGC graded should suffice.

I like this recommendation!

 

 

I guess I'm in the KISS category, a picture speaks a thousand words. One of the books that was PGX graded, was described as 2 different grades 3.0 to 3.5. The label said 3.0. I could see that happening with CGC, too...Maybe not with this particular seller, but we have a never ending trickle of whackadoodles;) who are forever inventing new ways to confuse buyers (and I'm not talking about our honest, present, in house innovators who are posting here.)

 

I kept the pictures btw if anyone needs them.

 

I always assumed for those that posted a picture with no label it was a situation of what scanner they had available, and those with legal-size scanners could show the entire book/case combination. Is that not the case?

 

If it is the case, then I am totally okay with someone posting a picture of the book and stating it is a CGC X.X with XX Pages.

[skypinkblu]

I don't think it's a problem for you to deal with him, but not on the boards...

 

 

 

I would like for us to petition Arch to follow Jim's suggestion. Anyone who sells a graded book, in a case, must show the label.

 

Does anyone object?

 

Would a poll be better than just asking?

(thumbs u

 

I think that either the label should be shown or declaring that the book is CGC graded should suffice.

I like this recommendation!

 

 

I guess I'm in the KISS category, a picture speaks a thousand words. One of the books that was PGX graded, was described as 2 different grades 3.0 to 3.5. The label said 3.0. I could see that happening with CGC, too...Maybe not with this particular seller, but we have a never ending trickle of whackadoodles;) who are forever inventing new ways to confuse buyers (and I'm not talking about our honest, present, in house innovators who are posting here.)

 

I kept the pictures btw if anyone needs them.

 

I always assumed for those that posted a picture with no label it was a situation of what scanner they had available, and those with legal-size scanners could show the entire book/case combination. Is that not the case?

 

If it is the case, then I am totally okay with someone posting a picture of the book and stating it is a CGC X.X with XX Pages.

 

When my scanner doesn't fit the slab (if I have a slab) I do two pictures...not a huge deal...even THEN at least part of the label shows in one scan...but these were digital pictures that were cropped, scanners were not an issue.

[User 01001010]

my scanner is not a legal size, i just scan from the label down or i just take a pic. showing the label is enough in my opinion to show the quality of the book, and i will scan the bottom half if there are any issues such as cracks or other signs of damage.

[Bosco685]

When my scanner doesn't fit the slab (if I have a slab) I do two pictures...not a huge deal...even THEN at least part of the label shows in one scan...but these were digital pictures that were cropped, scanners were not an issue.

 

Oh, I didn't mean with what you ran across recently. I was talking about in general.

 

But if it becomes the standard to do two scans (one with the label showing, one with the book itself), then I don't see that as a huge issue. But I'm still also okay with someone stating what the book is.

 

I've seen long-time board members post just the book grade/page quality and nobody gives them grief. So to set the stage for everyone are we going to make this clear on the new expectations, and hold them accountable to follow this standard? Many will post their books in advance of receiving them back from CGC - do we stop this practice now unless they get scans in advance from CGC?

[Bosco685]

WOW!

 

I was just sent the sample scans, and I would have never known I was looking at PGX encased books. Talk about poor form!

[skypinkblu]

If someone is having books graded at CGC, and they don't HAVE the book, I wouldn't see that as an issue...after all, they are coming from CGC and they are not showing a picture of a slab..

 

I'd just like to see the first rule expanded. Unfortunately, rules are not necessary for the 99.9 percent of the people who play fair, they are necessary because of the .01 percent of people who think they don't have to play fair.

 

The alternative, would be to put anyone who plays this game in the hall of shame...because honestly, it's shameful.

 

But it looks like we have enough of a majority to petition Arch, I'll wait till after the holiday...

 

Happy Holidays, btw:)

 

[MrBedrock]

Who are the five nitwits that have voted, "no"?

[Bosco685]

I'm okay with that as long as the same rule applies to everyone.

 

But if a new board member states that the book is still at CGC, and it is being pre-sold, then nobody should be giving them grief about potentially working around the rules. They are just doing the same as everyone else.

 

Otherwise, we are back to the old argument of post count rules around here versus equal trust and respect.

[skypinkblu]

I'm okay with that as long as the same rule applies to everyone.

 

But if a new board member states that the book is still at CGC, and it is being pre-sold, then nobody should be giving them grief about potentially working around the rules. They are just doing the same as everyone else.

 

Otherwise, we are back to the old argument of post count rules around here versus equal trust and respect.

 

I'm not a big fan of pre-sales myself, and especially from a new member...I mean...if someone with one post count posts that they have an Action 1 that is a 6.0 for $5,000, and it's on the way back from CGC, but he has no picture? are you going to buy it? :shrug:

 

But propose different language if you'd like...Richard, too..

[Aces]

Who are the five nitwits that have voted, "no"?

I think I did by mistake.

It was like 4AM on the boards last night just before maintenance and I was trying to go as fast through the sales threads as I could to see if I missed anything before I got locked out.

 

 

I retract my no vote.

 

 

[Bosco685]

I'm okay with that as long as the same rule applies to everyone.

 

But if a new board member states that the book is still at CGC, and it is being pre-sold, then nobody should be giving them grief about potentially working around the rules. They are just doing the same as everyone else.

 

Otherwise, we are back to the old argument of post count rules around here versus equal trust and respect.

 

I'm not a big fan of pre-sales myself, and especially from a new member...I mean...if someone with one post count posts that they have an Action 1 that is a 6.0 for $5,000, and it's on the way back from CGC, but he has no picture? are you going to buy it? :shrug:

 

But propose different language if you'd like...Richard, too..

Call me "Deary" when you state that.

 

 

 

Logically, I'm going to watch and wait versus buying from a new member. But fair is fair, and if we are going to have select rules depending on the length of your selling history, it's going to get a little tricky to manage and apply such expectations.

[MrBedrock]

Since we are all about maximizing information to protect buyers from ever having any problems I propose we go ahead and add a rule that states that any buyer is allowed to have his/her decision vetted by as many other board members as he/she sees fit, in a timeframe which has no limit, to protect said buyer from ever experiencing any stress during the decision making process, and further to alleviate any future buyer's remorse. If, at any time after the completion of the sale, the buyer experiences any buyer's remorse as a result of a comment made by another board member, an outside source, or an internal feeling, that buyer has the right to full return privileges. Failure of the seller to accommodate the return will result in immediate expulsion from the boards.

[Bosco685]

Petition Arch to change the selling rules making it imperitve to include a picture of the full label when selling any graded books

 

So we already had in the vote ANY graded book must have a picture posted. We're good then, which is why this option received my vote.

 

So even books currently at CGC will require a scan from CGC in advance of sales to prove it really is being graded by CGC, right?

[gaz973]

I don't think it's a problem for you to deal with him, but not on the boards...

 

 

 

I would like for us to petition Arch to follow Jim's suggestion. Anyone who sells a graded book, in a case, must show the label.

 

Does anyone object?

 

Would a poll be better than just asking?

(thumbs u

 

I think that either the label should be shown or declaring that the book is CGC graded should suffice.

A declaration means nothing. The ones that crop the label out to circumvent the already established rules wouldn't have any problem declaring a book to be CGC graded when it isn't.

 

While I agree that there are people here that would lie, it would be difficult for them to try selling on the boards while lying about who their books are encapsulated by, eg someone sells their ASM # 129 PGX 8.0 while conforming with board rules by declaring it as CGC 8.0. Somebody buys it and and says WTF when they find out it's PGX. It doesn't work for the seller.

 

If the rules said either scans of the label or declaration of encapsulation then anyone caught lying goes on the probation list, anybody who refuses to declare if their books are raw or CGC after being reminded of the rules gets put on the probation list.

[Mutie Fan]

I don't think it's a problem for you to deal with him, but not on the boards...

 

 

 

I would like for us to petition Arch to follow Jim's suggestion. Anyone who sells a graded book, in a case, must show the label.

 

Does anyone object?

 

Would a poll be better than just asking?

(thumbs u

 

I think that either the label should be shown or declaring that the book is CGC graded should suffice.

A declaration means nothing. The ones that crop the label out to circumvent the already established rules wouldn't have any problem declaring a book to be CGC graded when it isn't.

 

While I agree that there are people here that would lie, it would be difficult for them to try selling on the boards while lying about who their books are encapsulated by, eg someone sells their ASM # 129 PGX 8.0 while conforming with board rules by declaring it as CGC 8.0. Somebody buys it and and says WTF when they find out it's PGX. It doesn't work for the seller.

 

If the rules said either scans of the label or declaration of encapsulation then anyone caught lying goes on the probation list, anybody who refuses to declare if their books are raw or CGC after being reminded of the rules gets put on the probation list.

 

Phil already knew the rules and decided to list PGX books anyway. I voted yes for the change to the rules, but in the alternative why just not put Phil on the probation list or ban him from selling in the forum for a set period of time.

[Bio-Rupp]

 

Phil already knew the rules and decided to list PGX books anyway. I voted yes for the change to the rules, but in the alternative why just not put Phil on the probation list or ban him from selling in the forum for a set period of time.

 

Whoa now. Phil is nice fellow and sells quality material. To immediatly push the probation threat on Phil is premature at best.

 

As just witnessed about a month ago between POV and divad and the "Trey on the probation list - off the probation" list fiasco... whats going on here is to be handled by the Mods and was obviously settled upon with the Trey situation.

 

As I've stated before, if the Mods find a problem with any listing or seller and they deem it necessary for action, then let them do their job.

 

That said, have whatever ammendments made to whatever rules you find necessary to make each and every one of you sleep better at night.

 

Just please don't try to fry a seller UNTIL ANY NEW RULE IS AMMENDED AND PUT IN PLACE by the powers that be. Until then, just push the little "notify mods" button and let them do what they deem fit.

 

Phil really doesn't need the hassle right here at Christmas... does he?