General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Park]

I still feel there is more to discuss between the PIF participants and that better Guidelines and violation policies should be setup. And further, if we are going to have PIF setup like this, it should extend to any other venue based on contributions rather than sales, like the Secret Santa. A couple of so years back there was a tremendous Secret Santa brouhaha and most people were saying it did not fall under the PL/HOS venue. I don't see PIF as any different.

 

Was this the New Mutants 98 CGC 9.6 situation last year where someone that had to send a gift wouldn't ship to the UK? That was a little painful.

 

Supapimp several years ago with Anfield Fox (or whatever his name is now). It only came out last year in a public shaming in CG and Supapimp hasn't been around since.

 

Which I gotta say is ten times more effective than the PL but will get poofed immediately today.

[Park]

Oakman,

 

You obviously are not listening to what he is saying. The person that received the mylars and TPB did nothing wrong. They immediately sent out their pay it forward like they were supposed to. The sender is the one that is out the 75 mylars, 3 Trades and $ for shipping. Sometimes principle is just as important as money loss. Regardless, there is still a loss to Manicnerd and he was simply trying to warn people of a possible scammer. He is trying to do the right thing and look out for others. Why you guys can not see that someone that would do that in a PIF thread might do it as a seller on the boards is beyond me.

I don't know the whole story.I really should have just stayed out of it.Manicnerd no hard feelings,and I'm sorry I jumped conclusions.

 

Now that we are all on the same page, lets all post pictures making fun of Fingh. Those cheer me! Kidding Fingh...kidding!

 

This is the real truth. I am not going to apologize for my thinking the PIF is dumb (because I still do), but I do apologize to anyone whose feelings got hurt by my brusqueness and general horseassery.

 

via Imgflip Meme Maker

 

Nice donkey.

[Bosco685]

Was this the New Mutants 98 CGC 9.6 situation last year where someone that had to send a gift wouldn't ship to the UK? That was a little painful.

 

Supapimp several years ago with Anfield Fox (or whatever his name is now). It only came out last year in a public shaming in CG and Supapimp hasn't been around since.

 

Thought so.

[joecgcmaniac]

I still feel there is more to discuss between the PIF participants and that better Guidelines and violation policies should be setup. And further, if we are going to have PIF setup like this, it should extend to any other venue based on contributions rather than sales, like the Secret Santa. A couple of so years back there was a tremendous Secret Santa brouhaha and most people were saying it did not fall under the PL/HOS venue. I don't see PIF as any different.

 

Was this the New Mutants 98 CGC 9.6 situation last year where someone that had to send a gift wouldn't ship to the UK? That was a little painful.

 

Supapimp several years ago with Anfield Fox (or whatever his name is now). It only came out last year in a public shaming in CG and Supapimp hasn't been around since.

 

Which I gotta say is ten times more effective than the PL but will get poofed immediately today.

 

And even worse when boardies offered to pay for the shipping to the U.K., and even offered to have Supagimp ship the book to them in the U.S. and they would send it forward to Anfield.

[miraclemet]

*sigh* just watched another sale use partial GPA info to justify their price while leaving out GPA info that doesnt support it.

 

Scenario was (and Im making all the numbers up here, but they are fair parallels):

 

Selling Shadow 1 in CGC 7.0 for $9000

 

seller provides the following info:

Recent sale of a 6.5 here on the boards for $8k

Recent sale of a 5.5 in GPA for $8k

 

sounds like a deal, and maybe it is...

 

but the seller fails to mention that in 2012 an 8.0 sold for $4500, and an 8.5 sold for $9k

 

*sigh*

 

I do temper my sighs with the fact that the buyer can have access to all this information if they have GPA or spend some time researching, but just the 1/2 truth of sales data and picking and choosing your sales data, especially when there are only 5-6 points of data for the book anyway.

And there's some cutoff point for sure, listing sales data from 2009 is not useful, but when your line in the sand excludes value depressing info, while leaving value inflating info it looks a little

 

Am I overreacting? (probably)

Edited August 23, 2013 by Miraclemet

[Park]

*sigh* just watched another sale use partial GPA info to justify their price while leaving out GPA info that doesnt support it.

 

Scenario was (and Im making all the numbers up here, but they are fair parallels):

 

Selling Shadow 1 in CGC 7.0 for $9000

 

seller provides the following info:

Recent sale of a 6.5 here on the boards for $8k

Recent sale of a 5.5 in GPA for $8k

 

sounds like a deal, and maybe it is...

 

but the seller fails to mention that in 2012 an 8.0 sold for $4500, and an 8.5 sold for $9k

 

*sigh*

 

I do temper my sighs with the fact that the buyer can have access to all this information if they have GPA or spend some time researching, but just the 1/2 truth of sales data and picking and choosing your sales data, especially when there are only 5-6 points of data for the book anyway.

And there's some cutoff point for sure, listing sales data from 2009 is not useful, but when your line in the sand excludes value depressing info, while leaving value inflating info it looks a little

 

Am I overreacting? (probably)

 

I gotta say that if you (general) are spending several hundred dollars on up on a book and you can't be tasked with doing some due diligence, I don't have any sympathy for you.

[miraclemet]

on the PIF inclusion in HOS/PL.

 

Since the HOS/PL was created for the marketplace, and the marketplace includes the facilitation of straight trades, trades would fall under the HOS/PL guidelines?

 

I'm just trying to see what sort of precedence is already in place for the use of the HOS/PL for non-monetary transactions/occurrences.

 

If someone posted a WTT thread in the marketplace, and it was consummated with some sort of "deal!" then if either parties fail to meet the marketplace guidelines they could be nominated for the PL yes?

 

So the main thing is we are talking about applying the marketplace rules (and consequences) to transactions/exchanges/occurrences that have an "agreement" basis that occur outside of the marketplace. This would include: Secret Santa, Pay it Forward, or anything else that has an agreement that occurred here on the boards.

 

Does this mean failure to complete a "kick to the balls" transaction could land someone on the PL? (joking)

[bababooey]

I'm not sure which thread to post this in but I have two points to make that don't relate my questions surrounding clarity on PIF transactions.

 

1. A precedent for non-direct sale was added to the PL recently (Tibex82) offered a book in comicalgems' Oklahoma fundraiser & got nominated for not sending an $8 modern Batbook.

 

2. The "one place to look" argument is sort of over, I think POV acknowledged that a PIF inclusive PL could look something like this - some artistic license has been taken to reflect some of the whining.

 

8/1/13 PROBATION LIST UPDATE

 

 

added CarlWeathers75 & tibex82

CarlWeathers75 recommendation discussion

tibex82 recommendation discussion

 

THE HALL OF SHAME

 

The following Board Members have been elected by the community to the

Probation List's "Hall of Shame" for gross misconduct as members in the

Marketplace Forum:

 

[*] Herald2Galactus

(Inaugural Member & 1st "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

[*] gilbertotorres

(added 11/5/08 - 2nd "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

[*] ComicSupply

(added 10/28/08 - 3rd "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

[*] CAP freak

(added 5/21/09 - 4th "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

[*] AlleyBat aka BucOne aka WolfHulk aka Roxx Gang aka MarkWeb aka lastyle7 aka royig aka Punkkitty aka bamaboy aka Greenpep

(added 5/23/08 - 5th "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

[*] TFL

(added 6/2/09 - 6th "Hall of Shame" Member)

 

ETC.....

 

THE PROBATION LIST

 

The following Board Members are currently on "Probation" for failure to complete a Marketplace Forum transaction in good faith after one month's time. Those with an "Off-Board" notation indicate the failed transaction occurred outside of the CGC Message Boards.

 

 

[*] 50s Horror Buff (added 05/24/12)

 

[*] Ajaxfarrell (added 06/30/13)

 

[*] AshCan Press aka Matthew Rosenberg (added 5/17/13)

 

[*] aaron568 (added 11/6/08)

 

[*] Akiyama (added 02/15/12)

 

[*] Babygorilla (added 2/2/13)

 

ETC...

 

PL FOR PAY IT FORRD

Bathed in Flames

 

Edited August 23, 2013 by bababooey

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

Here's my on the whole PIF thing, for what it's worth.

 

 

1) I think the Mods stickied the thread in CG because they believed PIF would be a great community-building activity. I don't think they would do the same now after what it's become. When it gets to the point where you want formal punishment, it's doing the opposite of its original intention.

 

2) I completely agree with POV that charity, Christmas clubs, and contests don't belong in the PL/HOS. These types of activities have different rules, different goals, different discussions and should probably be handled within their own respective areas.

 

3) It's completely within the power of the PIF participants to change the rules on how they handle their activities to prevent any abuses from occurring in the first place. This is not possible with a regular monetary transaction.

 

For example...

 

A) The entrance requirement into the PIF is a completed shipment of books. This gives a credit which can then be used to claim someone else's offering.

 

B) No books can be claimed without a credit.

 

C) If someone fails to follow the rules and complete a shipment, it's no big deal because the person who originally wanted the books still has their credit to be used elsewhere.

 

D) You could even get creative with different types of credits: under $10, $10-25, $25-50, etc. These could also be combined - two $25 credits gives the ability to claim a $50 offering, etc.

 

This type of PIF would encourage "giving," and there would be no possibility of a failed shipment derailing the entire activity since it is a parallel process rather than a serial one.

 

 

Anyway, just my . Love it, hate it, or ignore it.

[bababooey]

 

No one but the OP entered the PIF thread "offering books" & "building up credit" - entrance is via claiming an item that you want and THEN making an offer within 24 hours.

 

That's why I don't see the "virtue" or "selflessness" in it that some do - I think it's great for those who want to get involved with others to swap books, make friends, have fun etc...but it's not charity.

 

 

 

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

No one but the OP entered the PIF thread "offering books" & "building up credit" - entrance is via claiming an item that you want and THEN making an offer within 24 hours.

 

That's why I don't see the "virtue" or "selflessness" in it that some do - I think it's great for those who want to get involved with others to swap books, make friends, have fun etc...but it's not charity.

 

 

 

That's why I'm emphasizing charity. The rules could easily be changed to make it a closed system where no abuse is possible. It's simple really.

 

Heck, I'd even make a few offerings without ever claiming anything just to get the parallel process going.

[slym2none]

I thought the Pay it Forward thread is a " here have this" type of thing? Get over it people.

 

And what happens when someone is promised "here have this" and doesn't get it? Even though they have already put themselves out money for shipping and the material, in this case, 75 Mylars?

 

:shrug:

They suck it up, and feel even better about themselves for sending out the 75 mylars? :shrug:

 

I guess that is what we should do then.

 

I change my vote on both those polls, even though I can't. Move one from the 'yes' column to the 'no' for all counts.

 

 

 

-slym

[techtre2003]

I want to change my vote from yes to no also.

[Sqeggs]

*sigh* just watched another sale use partial GPA info to justify their price while leaving out GPA info that doesnt support it.

 

Scenario was (and Im making all the numbers up here, but they are fair parallels):

 

Selling Shadow 1 in CGC 7.0 for $9000

 

seller provides the following info:

Recent sale of a 6.5 here on the boards for $8k

Recent sale of a 5.5 in GPA for $8k

 

sounds like a deal, and maybe it is...

 

but the seller fails to mention that in 2012 an 8.0 sold for $4500, and an 8.5 sold for $9k

 

*sigh*

 

I do temper my sighs with the fact that the buyer can have access to all this information if they have GPA or spend some time researching, but just the 1/2 truth of sales data and picking and choosing your sales data, especially when there are only 5-6 points of data for the book anyway.

And there's some cutoff point for sure, listing sales data from 2009 is not useful, but when your line in the sand excludes value depressing info, while leaving value inflating info it looks a little

 

Am I overreacting? (probably)

 

Assuming we are talking about the book that sold today, I see your point. In the seller's defense, looking at GPA, it is a little hard to make sense of where the market is going. Common problem for a thinly traded book like this. If it were me, I would have noted that in addition to a lower grade copy having recently sold for about what he was asking, there were four sales of higher grade copies last year for less than he was asking -- two of the copies went for much less than he was asking.

 

But anyone willing to pay more than $10K for a book has probably done some research on prices so maybe in the absence of available copies in this grade the buyer, at least, saw it as a good deal.

 

On your general point, selective quoting of GPA data is bothersome.

[bababooey]

You won't get one without the other.

 

 

 

.

 

[techtre2003]

You won't get one without the other.

 

 

 

.

 

 

If you care to see my reasoning you can check out the PIF thread.

[CAHokie]

Techtre, his ignorant comments have been deleted by the Mods along with the entire page.

[techtre2003]

yeah, just saw that. How convenient.

[techtre2003]

I think this thread is a new medium low, I don't know if I've ever seen so much schoolyard nonsense in one thread (not you Slym, I just had to answer someone)

 

 

New Poll

 

 

Thanks Sharon for cutting through the horse manure.

Only the CG posse could make something so spiteful for no reason. Again. (thumbs u

 

And that was after he posted this just 2 days ago

[miraclemet]

But anyone willing to pay more than $10K for a book has probably done some research on prices so maybe in the absence of available copies in this grade the buyer, at least, saw it as a good deal.

 

On your general point, selective quoting of GPA data is bothersome.

 

I assumed this was the case (the bolded). Anyone in the market for a 5 figure book has an idea of what s/he wants to pay for the book in a variety of grades. And with few sales, and very little ever hitting the market you strike when you get the chance.

 

I doubt the GPA info actually factored into the sale, it was just a 5 figure example of selective data mining to fit price justification (at least that's how it was presented).

 

 

Edited August 24, 2013 by Miraclemet