General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[Chaseman210]

You still did not answer the question. Is it ok to list the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5?

 

What was the book? Wasn't it a ST 115?

 

Yes, I believe so.

[Jimmy Linguini]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

 

I wonder who is on more do not buy lists, you or me.

 

a board member on the weekend said on the weekend, after I met them and blew them off - "I was trying to be nice". I should have taken a lesson from him.

[Columbia Comics]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

 

I wonder who is on more do not buy lists, you or me.

 

a board member on the weekend said on the weekend, after I met them and blew them off - "I was trying to be nice". I should have taken a lesson from him.

 

If someone doesn't want to sell to us, there are 5 others who will. I learned real quick that if you aren't doing business w/someone b/c you dislike something they said or a position they took...you're only harming yourself.

 

I got over that real quick....I don't have a "do not buy from" list nor do I have a "do not sell to" list. Well..maybe Roy!

[Jimmy Linguini]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

 

I wonder who is on more do not buy lists, you or me.

 

a board member on the weekend said on the weekend, after I met them and blew them off - "I was trying to be nice". I should have taken a lesson from him.

 

If someone doesn't want to sell to us, there are 5 others who will. I learned real quick that if you aren't doing business w/someone b/c you dislike something they said or a position they took...you're only harming yourself.

 

I got over that real quick....I don't have a "do not buy from" list nor do I have a "do not sell to" list. Well..maybe Roy!

 

I really think you should reexamine this.

by placing a in a sales thread you're not welcome in, which you have, it reflects more poorly on you than the seller.

[Columbia Comics]

You still did not answer the question. Is it ok to list the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5?

 

What was the book? Wasn't it a ST 115?

 

Yes, I believe so.

 

Before I issue a retraction, I want to see the book first. Sadly I cannot locate it.

 

Help anyone?

[Boboset]

You still did not answer the question. Is it ok to list the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5?

 

What was the book? Wasn't it a ST 115?

 

Yes. It's the first point in my first post on this subject.

 

Come on man. Did you read what I wrote or are you just going after me based on what you deem as "malicious practices"?

 

 

[DR.X]

I got over that real quick....I don't have a "do not buy from" list nor do I have a "do not sell to" list. Well..maybe Roy!

 

So your saying you will buy from basically anyone, which would include scammers, liars, or anyone with no ethics for this hobby?

[Columbia Comics]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

 

I wonder who is on more do not buy lists, you or me.

 

a board member on the weekend said on the weekend, after I met them and blew them off - "I was trying to be nice". I should have taken a lesson from him.

 

If someone doesn't want to sell to us, there are 5 others who will. I learned real quick that if you aren't doing business w/someone b/c you dislike something they said or a position they took...you're only harming yourself.

 

I got over that real quick....I don't have a "do not buy from" list nor do I have a "do not sell to" list. Well..maybe Roy!

 

I really think you should reexamine this.

by placing a in a sales thread you're not welcome in, which you have, it reflects more poorly on you than the seller.

 

I have as I wasn't aware of that until the seller stated it in the thread. I don't believe you have to worry about that mistake happening again.

[skypinkblu]

I asked Chip to answer the other day, he said he would not. I didn't post that, because I was hoping he'd change his mind.

 

It might be very simple if he did. I'm sure he thinks there will be roaring and gnashing of teeth, but that's been done already...so Chip, I hope you change your mind.

 

I'm impressed with Boboset's patience and statistical acumen. It might look simple to you, Brock, because you are in the field, but to me it looked like a lot of work.

[Jimmy Linguini]

 

I think you've done one or two things that have had people react to you and you think its trolling.

 

Its not, but I don't disagree with your other points. I do think when you realize the one or two things that upset people you'll have a better idea of board politics and the cliques. But, that again is just my opinion.

 

this is the most lucid post I've ever read from you

 

you have now achieved Level 5 Laser Lotus

 

I dedicate this song to Alex (Jimmy):

 

 

I wonder who is on more do not buy lists, you or me.

 

a board member on the weekend said on the weekend, after I met them and blew them off - "I was trying to be nice". I should have taken a lesson from him.

 

If someone doesn't want to sell to us, there are 5 others who will. I learned real quick that if you aren't doing business w/someone b/c you dislike something they said or a position they took...you're only harming yourself.

 

I got over that real quick....I don't have a "do not buy from" list nor do I have a "do not sell to" list. Well..maybe Roy!

 

I really think you should reexamine this.

by placing a in a sales thread you're not welcome in, which you have, it reflects more poorly on you than the seller.

 

I have as I wasn't aware of that until the seller stated it in the thread. I don't believe you have to worry about that mistake happening again.

 

I'm not worried. I just think you're confusing trolling with direct responses to your own behaviour. I'm sure if that changed the "trolls" with go away.

[Boboset]

I know you don't like me CC, I've given you enough reasons to feel that way. Much like my admiration of your recent MPS benefit thread (that was wonderful, great work), I hope you can see past the dislike and look at the issue at hand here.

[jaybuck43]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

 

I haven't seen any of the posts/threads you're referencing. If that's the case, then maybe he made a mistake, maybe not. I haven't asked him that....

 

But I can also attest to grading very conservatively on here when selling raw books. I can specifically name two instances where I sold raw books:

 

An X-Men 141 - I graded it an 8.5; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 :shrug:

An ST 37 - I said 9.2, maybe 9.4; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 as well.

 

The second example isn't as extreme as the first, but there's a reason people ask me if we're having a raw sale....I tend to go a grade lower just to be "safe."

 

Why? B/c buyers here would crucify sellers if they sold a 9.0 book that came back an 8.5 or GOD forbid, an 8.0....

 

Its truly a cannot win scenario....so I just stopped selling raw books unless I'm pennies into them.

 

Brock:

I'm just gonna throw something in here that I've sat on for a while because I didn't feel like stirring the pot but your comments here have me a bit upset. Back in January we discussed the purchase of an ASM 4. You told me "it's at least 4.0" and that "I stand behind my grade" and had put it in the PGM where it did receive a variety of grades as low as a 3.0 (I think) and as high as a 5.5 (again I think) When negotiating with you I told you that it was my belief that it was a 3.0. You priced it and I figured eh you know what your doing and maybe I'm just grading it harsh because its a scan plus I'm negotiating so I'm probably seeing more flaws to try to get the price down. Fine. Got the book and sent it to CGC and low and behold it came back 3.0 CROW. Mentioned that discrepancy to you and asked you what you wanted to do about it. Was ignored but whatever let it go. Only reason I mention it is because you're making it sound like all you've ever done with raws is undergrade.

 

*eta* here is the PGM http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7327433

 

Here is the book:

Edited September 3, 2014 by jaybuck43

[Chip Cataldo]

Hello everyone,

 

In the Giving Tree thread, I posted the grade the ST #115 had received when it was put in the PGM section previous to me purchasing it (which consensus-wise was a 4.0 average). I didn't agree with that grade when I got the book in-hand (I usually disagree with the PGM grading) but as to not cause trouble here on the CGC forum that's the grade I quoted when people inquired. People have had it out for me in that thread since the beginning so I didn't want to rock the boat.

 

Regarding my eBay sales, I grade the best I can when putting up several hundred comics each week. I offer a no-questions-asked 14-day return policy where I even pay the return shipping if anyone isn't satisfied for any reason (including the book's grade). I am a Top-Rated Power Seller on there with nearly $100,000 in sales over the past 12 months (nearly all raw comics). I have 99.7% positive feedback (over 500 this month alone) and high Detailed Seller Ratings across the board (including "Item As Described"). If someone isn't satisfied with a grade on any book they purchase I have them return it and I re-evaluate my grade before I re-list. Nearly all of the time I will inquire exactly what the buyer thought was wrong in my grading so I can improve.

 

Peace,

 

Chip

[Columbia Comics]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

 

I haven't seen any of the posts/threads you're referencing. If that's the case, then maybe he made a mistake, maybe not. I haven't asked him that....

 

But I can also attest to grading very conservatively on here when selling raw books. I can specifically name two instances where I sold raw books:

 

An X-Men 141 - I graded it an 8.5; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 :shrug:

An ST 37 - I said 9.2, maybe 9.4; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 as well.

 

The second example isn't as extreme as the first, but there's a reason people ask me if we're having a raw sale....I tend to go a grade lower just to be "safe."

 

Why? B/c buyers here would crucify sellers if they sold a 9.0 book that came back an 8.5 or GOD forbid, an 8.0....

 

Its truly a cannot win scenario....so I just stopped selling raw books unless I'm pennies into them.

 

Brock:

I'm just gonna throw something in here that I've sat on for a while because I didn't feel like stirring the pot but your comments here have me a bit upset. Back in January we discussed the purchase of an ASM 4. You told me "it's at least 4.0" and that "I stand behind my grade" and had put it in the PGM where it did receive a variety of grades as low as a 3.0 (I think) and as high as a 5.5 (again I think) When negotiating with you I told you that it was my belief that it was a 3.0. You priced it and I figured eh you know what your doing and maybe I'm just grading it harsh because its a scan plus I'm negotiating so I'm probably seeing more flaws to try to get the price down. Fine. Got the book and sent it to CGC and low and behold it came back 3.0 CROW. Mentioned that discrepancy to you and asked you what you wanted to do about it. Was ignored but whatever let it go. Only reason I mention it is because you're making it sound like all you've ever done with raws is undergrade.

 

*eta* here is the PGM http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7327433

 

Here is the book:

 

You are correct. I missed that one. And I have offered, and will offer again, to buy the book back. So it wasn't ignored.

 

And FWIW, I still disagree with that grade....

Edited September 3, 2014 by Columbia Comics

[Boboset]

I asked Chip to answer the other day, he said he would not. I didn't post that, because I was hoping he'd change his mind.

 

It might be very simple if he did. I'm sure he thinks there will be roaring and gnashing of teeth, but that's been done already...so Chip, I hope you change your mind.

 

I'm impressed with Boboset's patience and statistical acumen. It might look simple to you, Brock because you are in the field, but to me it looked like a lot of work.

 

Thank you for the compliments Sharon. It was a lot of work.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Boboset

[Columbia Comics]

I know you don't like me CC, I've given you enough reasons to feel that way. Much like my admiration of your recent MPS benefit thread (that was wonderful, great work), I hope you can see past the dislike and look at the issue at hand here.

 

I have looked at all the books that you posted and I can see why you feel the way you feel.

 

And after assessing, I'm about 50/50. Some I would agree w/the assessment given by the PGM and others I wouldn't...

 

So that's fine. Some do appear to be overgraded (by my standards, not the PGM) while others are reasonable.

 

So I will backtrack and apologize for my total disagreement. Apparently its a 50% disagreement.

 

And my opinion of you has improved b/c frankly, I'm surprised you haven't lashed out at me.

 

Going to send a PM to bury a hatchet!

[jsilverjanet]

[jaybuck43]

It is difficult to grade a book by scans. As a result, the PGM forum has historically *undergraded* books . This is a well known fact to board members who have been here for a long while. There are psychological reasons involved, too, that needn't be gotten into here.

 

I agree with this statement.

 

It's easy to undergrade here to be "safe" and not set expectations too high. Also, there's a hidden pressure to not overgrade in the PGM because you can look bad if you're wrong. I don't post PGMs often. The last one I did got a lot of 8.0s and 8.5s and only one 9.0 assessment. CGC came back with a 9.0. This example illustrates the above.

 

Another thing to consider is that scans are overly critical of a books condition. What I mean by that is that scans reveal issues that really don't stand out in hand. So a book could look much better in hand than on a scan.

 

Just my

 

And for the record I have bought books from Chip once (I think) and had no issues.

 

One final thought: I think this issue would be much worse if Chip was selling a book here as a 4.0 and then listing it on eBay as a 5.5 (in the previous example). Getting the opinions of others and then making a decision "on the ground" is a different thing in my mind.

 

Almost always in the same direction, though?

 

Isn't it a bit telling that he's not attempting to make any of these points in his own behalf?

 

Coming into this thread and commenting will do nothing but toss fuel on the fire. It's just what the big trolls want, right Boboset??

 

No. What I want is honesty and transparency when it comes to selling the funny books that I love so much. I'm disappointed, but not at all surprised, that you don't see that.

 

You think dealing the same book here as a 4.0 but on ebay as a 5.5 is ok? As Chips biggest defender, it's safe to assume you are ok with that. Correct?

 

I'm not so much defending Chip as I am attacking your malicious practices. You're the first person to jump all over someone based on unfounded allegations.

 

I hate to break it to you...but the people offering up grades in the PGM thread aren't very good...and its probably no fault of their own as I've said, and WILL SAY IT AGAIN, you cannot grade a comic based on a two dimensional image. You need the book in hand.

 

Honestly and transparency you say? So if he posts a book in the PGM thread...and let's say the avg is a 4.5...yet he feels it's a 5.0 to 5.5, should he post both opinions?

 

Something like: CGC boards grade it a 4.5 (but they're usually low (and sometimes REAL low). I give it a 5.5....so maybe it falls in the middle?

 

transparency would be saying an ad page has been removed or a MVS has been cut out. I don't believe he's flat out trying to deceive. How the hell can you deceive when you're offering up an opinion based on a flawed system?? And mind you, who's grading standards are we applying? B/c OSPG and CGC aren't N'Sync

 

If you have a problem, just don't buy. Or make your own judgments instead of relying on a seller's assessment. And if you're unhappy, return the book. Its pretty simple.

 

Yet you continue to cause a big stink....krap in the TGT thread and cause headache after headache...but I guess since its for the "funny books that you love" its all ok. Correct??

 

Brock,

 

I see what you're saying. But in this situation, I think the main issue is being overlooked. The issue doesn't lie with the grades estimated in the PGM (because, yes, they're flawed). The issue is that Chip listed the book on eBay as a 5.5, and IN HIS OWN POST, said the grade was a 4.0 in TGT. So it's not about what grades were in the PGM. It's that Chip listed his own opinion of the grades on two different places and two different numbers.

 

I understand your point of view here, but I don't think the is because of PGM.

 

I haven't seen any of the posts/threads you're referencing. If that's the case, then maybe he made a mistake, maybe not. I haven't asked him that....

 

But I can also attest to grading very conservatively on here when selling raw books. I can specifically name two instances where I sold raw books:

 

An X-Men 141 - I graded it an 8.5; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 :shrug:

An ST 37 - I said 9.2, maybe 9.4; CGC disagreed, gave it a 9.6 as well.

 

The second example isn't as extreme as the first, but there's a reason people ask me if we're having a raw sale....I tend to go a grade lower just to be "safe."

 

Why? B/c buyers here would crucify sellers if they sold a 9.0 book that came back an 8.5 or GOD forbid, an 8.0....

 

Its truly a cannot win scenario....so I just stopped selling raw books unless I'm pennies into them.

 

Brock:

I'm just gonna throw something in here that I've sat on for a while because I didn't feel like stirring the pot but your comments here have me a bit upset. Back in January we discussed the purchase of an ASM 4. You told me "it's at least 4.0" and that "I stand behind my grade" and had put it in the PGM where it did receive a variety of grades as low as a 3.0 (I think) and as high as a 5.5 (again I think) When negotiating with you I told you that it was my belief that it was a 3.0. You priced it and I figured eh you know what your doing and maybe I'm just grading it harsh because its a scan plus I'm negotiating so I'm probably seeing more flaws to try to get the price down. Fine. Got the book and sent it to CGC and low and behold it came back 3.0 CROW. Mentioned that discrepancy to you and asked you what you wanted to do about it. Was ignored but whatever let it go. Only reason I mention it is because you're making it sound like all you've ever done with raws is undergrade.

 

*eta* here is the PGM http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7327433

 

Here is the book:

 

 

You are correct. I missed that one. And I have offered, and will offer again, to buy the book back. So it wasn't ignored.

 

That's fine Brock. I appreciate your comment. I've already sold the book, like I said the point was in regard to the fact that your comments had been in a way to make it that you always undergrade.

[jsilverjanet]

Hello everyone,

 

In the Giving Tree thread, I posted the grade the ST #115 had received when it was put in the PGM section previous to me purchasing it (which consensus-wise was a 4.0 average). I didn't agree with that grade when I got the book in-hand (I usually disagree with the PGM grading) but as to not cause trouble here on the CGC forum that's the grade I quoted when people inquired. People have had it out for me in that thread since the beginning so I didn't want to rock the boat.

 

Regarding my eBay sales, I grade the best I can when putting up several hundred comics each week. I offer a no-questions-asked 14-day return policy where I even pay the return shipping if anyone isn't satisfied for any reason (including the book's grade). I am a Top-Rated Power Seller on there with nearly $100,000 in sales over the past 12 months (nearly all raw comics). I have 99.7% positive feedback (over 500 this month alone) and high Detailed Seller Ratings across the board (including "Item As Described"). If someone isn't satisfied with a grade on any book they purchase I have them return it and I re-evaluate my grade before I re-list. Nearly all of the time I will inquire exactly what the buyer thought was wrong in my grading so I can improve.

 

Peace,

 

Chip

 

I'm not sure why no one has responded to your post, but I think many of us appreciate you taking the time to respond.

 

I'm not sure what questions others may have from your statement, but I'm going to assume that because you felt the book was better than the PGM 4.0 grade you had it as a 5.5 on ebay, so is it safe to assume your grade for the ST115 is 5.5, correct?

 

 

[Logan510]

Most concerning to me is that apparently Chip is ignoring this discussion.

 

I don't know how to say this any clearer:

 

He's not going to come in and comment. B/c it doesn't matter what he says, the TROLLS will turn his words against him; they always do.

 

Why would anyone voluntarily step into the firing squad??

 

who are the TROLLS?

 

 

It truly doesn't take much to figure that out...look for the pack of individuals who all roll in around the same time when an "issue" has been been brought to light. True or not, they all pile on and make it their sole purpose to spew hate. They never say a positive word about anyone except themselves....

It's too late in the day for me to try to decipher a list. Could you post one for me?

If you don't know The List, you're probably on it.

 

I'm sure I'm on it.

I like to be on lists.

Yeah, I could be on it too. Funny thing is, I think I'd find myself on Logan's "hoop jumpers and Defenders of Everything" list as well. It takes work to make everyone think you're a *spoon*.

Brother you are cool in my book,must make me a *spoon* too!

 

Not even close to being the reason

Smart azz!