It is so simple -- why is it made so complex and even silly?

[bluechip]

This from a thread started in the GA forum. Posting here because this has been gone over so many times, I thought it was worth spelling out here as well and isolating as a separate thread.

 

Hello All,

There have been a great many threads devoted to pointing out the crack/press/resub game that's going on. I have been reading them & frankly I am more than a little concerned...Big kudos to Master Chief for his Manufactured Gold thread. As a collector from old just coming back into collecting late this past year, I have had a lot of catching up to do, to include gaining knowledge about CGC, how the hobby has escalated, advances in collecting supplies and of course book trimming & other forms of restoration to include pressing.

 

While many conclude (including CGC) that pressing is not considered restoration, this point gives me pause: Books are being pressed and resubmitted for higher grades. In effect, they are altering the books' original condition and modifying it into a higher(?) grade. In addition, THIS IS NOT BEING DISCLOSED. If there is nothing wrong with pressing, why not simply disclose it? If they are trying to get a higher grade for a higher overhead, why not "man up" & admit it? There are a lot of people who feel pressing is not a big issue, period. There are those out there who don't care if the book has been pressed AS LONG AS IT'S DISCLOSED. These people will still buy the book. And, finally there are people who are against pressing altogether. Is it because of the latter that disclosure is not an option for these people?

 

CL, Heritage, Pedigree, and others who suspect books are pressed or actually have it done themselves are doing a disservice to people by failing to disclose what has been done or even SUSPECTED of being done. This subversion & deceit further adds to the negative stigma (and rightly so) that pressing brings to the table.

 

My main concern is for us collectors who indulge in the occasional HG book. Some of us don't have the knowledge and/or resources to be able to spot that resubbed book and know that 4 months ago this 9.6 was a 9.2 or 9.4. What about us? How can we protect ourselves from being cheated, because in essence not telling is the same as lying. If a book is altered & there's nothing wrong about doing it, then why not disclose it? How can we "normal collectors" not get taken for a ride?

 

I for one, don't want a book that's been physically altered unless I am going into the transaction knowing full well what has taken place. I'm almost scared now to buy a slabbed HG SA, because I don't know if last week it was two grades lower. What if CGC FINDS A WAY TO DETECT PRESSING? And make no mistake, someday a way to detect it WILL be found...Will it then be considered restoration? If that's the case, there are going to be a LOT of books that will become PLODDED in the future...This hobby is entering dangerous times now, and if we are not careful a LOT of negativity will be associated with it.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

The single best first step to having all work disclosed, pressing included, is to work toward destigmatizing the work in the first place.

 

If you take away the stigmatized labels and describe all work on the same labels, then people who obsesse about avoiding particulat types of work including pressing, will still be able to avoid it.

 

And if you take away the stigma then people who don't mind purchasing books will be less worried their purchase will be stigmatized.

 

People who have books with a little bit of work done to them will feel less like they might just as well go ahead and do a whole lot of work because all restored books are lumped into one stigmatized barrel. That will lead to more people doing as little work as possible to books that don't need much work to look presentable.

 

If you label every alteration to the book simply as a defect, instead of trying to stigmatize (and multiply the effect of) defects caused by "intent," then people can judge the grade of a book without having to argue over who can read the mind of the former owner or aruge about whether we should multiply the effect of the damge as a means of punishing the thought behind it..

 

In short -- every defects and alternation (even pressing) can be noted wfor what it is without guessing as to how it happened.

 

Any of the above -- or all of the above -- will lead to less sellers feeling they have to hide what they've done.

[FFB]

If it is this simple, why did you need to start two virtually identical threads about it?

[DeeDee-migration]

[bluechip]

If it is this simple, why did you need to start two virtually identical threads about it?

 

 

Good point.

 

I do not know what happened, actually. I must've been caught momentarily in a time loop.

 

Good point.

 

I do not know what happened, actually. I must've been caught momentarily in a time loop.

 

Good point.

 

I do not know what happened, actually. I must've been caught momentarily in a time loop.

[ArAich]

You lost me at "Hello"....

[bluechip]

You lost me at "Hello"....

 

 

Let me guess.

 

You LOVE the purple labels.

 

(that one for sure)

 

Think all restored books are *spoon*.

 

(almost certainly)

 

You don't like anybody saying anything different.

 

(obviously)

 

You have lots of high grade books and never buy restored books and/or you like that PLODs make them cheap.

 

(probably)

[comicdonna]

How many words a minute do you type? You must be up to 10,000,000,001 words by now.

[ArAich]

You lost me at "Hello"....

 

 

Let me guess.

 

You LOVE the purple labels.

 

(that one for sure)

 

Think all restored books are *spoon*.

 

(almost certainly)

 

You don't like anybody saying anything different.

 

(obviously)

 

You have lots of high grade books and never buy restored books and/or you like that PLODs make them cheap.

 

(probably)

 

 

ummmm....what???...

[djpinkpanther67]

The single best first step to having all work disclosed, pressing included, is to work toward destigmatizing the work in the first place.

 

If you take away the stigmatized labels and describe all work on the same labels, then people who obsesse about avoiding particulat types of work including pressing, will still be able to avoid it.

 

And if you take away the stigma then people who don't mind purchasing books will be less worried their purchase will be stigmatized.

 

People who have books with a little bit of work done to them will feel less like they might just as well go ahead and do a whole lot of work because all restored books are lumped into one stigmatized barrel. That will lead to more people doing as little work as possible to books that don't need much work to look presentable.

 

If you label every alteration to the book simply as a defect, instead of trying to stigmatize (and multiply the effect of) defects caused by "intent," then people can judge the grade of a book without having to argue over who can read the mind of the former owner or aruge about whether we should multiply the effect of the damge as a means of punishing the thought behind it..

 

In short -- every defects and alternation (even pressing) can be noted wfor what it is without guessing as to how it happened.

 

Any of the above -- or all of the above -- will lead to less sellers feeling they have to hide what they've done.

 

I didn't start that thread (it was in Comics General not GA ,BTW) to state that all is lost & that no one should be trusted. I was simply trying to figure out ways people who don't always think to know or have the resources to possibly be able to check into a book's history if nondisclosure has become a possiblity.

 

That fact that sellers ARE having pressing done & not disclosing it is what's creating the negative stigma - not the pressing itself. They are doing it to themselves. There's an old saying "The truth shall set you free"...A lot of the hype and negative impressions of these activities could be reduced simlpy by stating what was done. There is a large enough buyer's market for this to be a reality, as this is type of alteration to a books original condition is not an issue to a lot of people.

 

Would want you buy a beautiful car that looks & runs good has had the engine replaced & the odometer set back 30,000 miles without knowing about it? Different example, same principle...

[bluechip]

The single best first step to having all work disclosed, pressing included, is to work toward destigmatizing the work in the first place.

 

If you take away the stigmatized labels and describe all work on the same labels, then people who obsesse about avoiding particulat types of work including pressing, will still be able to avoid it.

 

And if you take away the stigma then people who don't mind purchasing books will be less worried their purchase will be stigmatized.

 

People who have books with a little bit of work done to them will feel less like they might just as well go ahead and do a whole lot of work because all restored books are lumped into one stigmatized barrel. That will lead to more people doing as little work as possible to books that don't need much work to look presentable.

 

If you label every alteration to the book simply as a defect, instead of trying to stigmatize (and multiply the effect of) defects caused by "intent," then people can judge the grade of a book without having to argue over who can read the mind of the former owner or aruge about whether we should multiply the effect of the damge as a means of punishing the thought behind it..

 

In short -- every defects and alternation (even pressing) can be noted wfor what it is without guessing as to how it happened.

 

Any of the above -- or all of the above -- will lead to less sellers feeling they have to hide what they've done.

 

I didn't start that thread (it was in Comics General not GA ,BTW) to state that all is lost & that no one should be trusted. I was simply trying to figure out ways people who don't always think to know or have the resources to possibly be able to check into a book's history if nondisclosure has become a possiblity.

 

That fact that sellers ARE having pressing done & not disclosing it is what's creating the negative stigma - not the pressing itself. They are doing it to themselves. There's an old saying "The truth shall set you free"...A lot of the hype and negative impressions of these activities could be reduced simlpy by stating what was done. There is a large enough buyer's market for this to be a reality, as this is type of alteration to a books original condition is not an issue to a lot of people.

 

Would want you buy a beautiful car that looks & runs good has had the engine replaced & the odometer set back 30,000 miles without knowing about it? Different example, same principle...

 

All your points are well made and I agree you with. I want to clarify about the word "stigma" though. Stigma is not something created by the person or the thing that is stigmatized. Stigmas are created by other people and by definition their purpose is to create an emotional reaction to that person or thing.

 

If people want to have a negative emotional reaction to a defect based on what they believe somebody might have been thinking when it occured, they are free to do so. And if they want other people to feel the same way that is their right. But a grading service is supposed to be about pointing out defects -- not about categorizing them by intent and attempting to create a stigma, labelling some defects worse than identical defects simply because of the (presumed) thought behind it.

 

So long as the grading service does that there will never be an end to the screaming over what does and does not deserve a stigma label.

 

If CGC were tro get out of the thought-crime punishment and focus on the detailed description of defect business, it would better serve everybody.

 

I understand the emotions behind wanting to "catch" the restoration guy, but so long as all the defects of color touch, etc are disclosed there is no need to categorize or stigmatize them based on prognostications about what the "intent" was.

 

If I want a mind-reading act, I can always get one at the Magic Castle.

 

I would like to have a place to go for simple grading unadorned by Cotton Mathers of comics looking to punish sinners for thought-crimes

[djpinkpanther67]

All your points are well made and I agree you with. I want to clarify about the word "stigma" though. Stigma is not something created by the person or the thing that is stigmatized. Stigmas are created by other people and by definition their purpose is to create an emotional reaction to that person or thing.

 

If people want to have a negative emotional reaction to a defect based on what they believe somebody might have been thinking when it occured, they are free to do so. And if they want other people to feel the same way that is their right. But a grading service is supposed to be about pointing out defects -- not about categorizing them by intent and attempting to create a stigma, labelling some defects worse than identical defects simply because of the (presumed) thought behind it.

 

So long as the grading service does that there will never be an end to the screaming over what does and does not deserve a stigma label.

 

If CGC were tro get out of the thought-crime punishment and focus on the detailed description of defect business, it would better serve everybody.

 

I understand the emotions behind wanting to "catch" the restoration guy, but so long as all the defects of color touch, etc are disclosed there is no need to categorize or stigmatize them based on prognostications about what the "intent" was.

 

If I want a mind-reading act, I can always get one at the Magic Castle.

 

I would like to have a place to go for simple grading unadorned by Cotton Mathers of comics looking to punish sinners for thought-crimes

Guess I should be reading more "Webster's" instead of "Fantastic Four"

I am not witch hunting per say, just want people to start being honest about what's being done. I realize restoration is necessary in some cases to preserve a book. When I finally start collecting GAs I realize the only way to afford to buy certain issues IS to get PLOD restored ones, & I will cross that bridge when I get to it.

[Lazyboy]

The single best first step to having all work disclosed, pressing included, is to work toward destigmatizing the work in the first place.

 

If you take away the stigmatized labels and describe all work on the same labels, then people who obsesse about avoiding particulat types of work including pressing, will still be able to avoid it.

 

And if you take away the stigma then people who don't mind purchasing books will be less worried their purchase will be stigmatized.

 

People who have books with a little bit of work done to them will feel less like they might just as well go ahead and do a whole lot of work because all restored books are lumped into one stigmatized barrel. That will lead to more people doing as little work as possible to books that don't need much work to look presentable.

 

If you label every alteration to the book simply as a defect, instead of trying to stigmatize (and multiply the effect of) defects caused by "intent," then people can judge the grade of a book without having to argue over who can read the mind of the former owner or aruge about whether we should multiply the effect of the damge as a means of punishing the thought behind it..

 

In short -- every defects and alternation (even pressing) can be noted wfor what it is without guessing as to how it happened.

 

Any of the above -- or all of the above -- will lead to less sellers feeling they have to hide what they've done.

 

I didn't start that thread (it was in Comics General not GA ,BTW) to state that all is lost & that no one should be trusted. I was simply trying to figure out ways people who don't always think to know or have the resources to possibly be able to check into a book's history if nondisclosure has become a possiblity.

 

That fact that sellers ARE having pressing done & not disclosing it is what's creating the negative stigma - not the pressing itself. They are doing it to themselves. There's an old saying "The truth shall set you free"...A lot of the hype and negative impressions of these activities could be reduced simlpy by stating what was done. There is a large enough buyer's market for this to be a reality, as this is type of alteration to a books original condition is not an issue to a lot of people.

 

Would want you buy a beautiful car that looks & runs good has had the engine replaced & the odometer set back 30,000 miles without knowing about it? Different example, same principle...

 

All your points are well made and I agree you with. I want to clarify about the word "stigma" though. Stigma is not something created by the person or the thing that is stigmatized. Stigmas are created by other people and by definition their purpose is to create an emotional reaction to that person or thing.

 

If people want to have a negative emotional reaction to a defect based on what they believe somebody might have been thinking when it occured, they are free to do so. And if they want other people to feel the same way that is their right. But a grading service is supposed to be about pointing out defects -- not about categorizing them by intent and attempting to create a stigma, labelling some defects worse than identical defects simply because of the (presumed) thought behind it.

 

So long as the grading service does that there will never be an end to the screaming over what does and does not deserve a stigma label.

 

If CGC were tro get out of the thought-crime punishment and focus on the detailed description of defect business, it would better serve everybody.

 

I understand the emotions behind wanting to "catch" the restoration guy, but so long as all the defects of color touch, etc are disclosed there is no need to categorize or stigmatize them based on prognostications about what the "intent" was.

 

If I want a mind-reading act, I can always get one at the Magic Castle.

 

I would like to have a place to go for simple grading unadorned by Cotton Mathers of comics looking to punish sinners for thought-crimes

 

I think what happened after CGC started gaining acceptance is that older collectors looking to sell some of their books started to submit and ended up getting PLODs back. Although I think the Purple label stigmatizes books to some extent, I think the root of that is all the collectors who just found out the truth. They got burned years ago on what they thought were unrestored books and so now turned away from restoration (well, at least what is considered restoration by CGC) entirely.

 

Realistically, if you have a choice between two identical books, one unrestored and one restored, for the same price, you'd have to be an *spoon* to take the restored book. Why would you pay the same amount or more for a book that has been worked on than you would for an untouched survivor? It's just a matter of relative value, the same as it is for condition. The entire comics market is based on falsehoods, misconceptions, and "market availability" (as opposed to actual supply) anyway.