quick impromptu survey about current issues

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I want to make sure I am making the decision that most of the board prefers. In a simple yes or no should this stuff (PSA and CU members squabbles) be allowed to continue. I am just getting a feel ......thanks in advance<br /><br />Yes- let it go<br />No- please put me out of my mysery and stop it....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>I think grouping the CU member squabbles with the grading company stuff is unfair. I can't imagine anyone here cares about CU message board squabbles, but grading company standards and accountability are something some of us do care about; that said - we don't need 4 concurrent threads on the topic.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I agree but the last few days that's the way it seems to me....kind of intermingled....Don't worry if there are legit issues by others they will be let go...and I am not saying whether these current ones are even legit or not.....lets see the consensus...I am definitely never opposed to reversing a decision like this if it's incorrect....or I am convinced it's better to reverse it. I make mistakes all of the time <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott L</b><p>Leon<br />I hear sirens....I think the spelling police are coming. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />I agree with Matt that issues with grading companies can be important but 4 threads going at the same time is a bit much.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I don't really mind it if it stays in one thread...unfortunately Matt R likes to start new threads about the same issue over and over. One good thing that has come from the squabble is that a few CU board members have come over that may not have known about the Net54 forum before.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Seth B.</b><p>No.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mark Evans</b><p>But the better answer is "it depends." I think the good and bad of third-party grading is a proper subject of discussion. The problem, as I see it, is Matt's approach -- too intense, appearing to be an effort to dominate the board. He should have limited his concern to one thread and those who wished to engage him (preferably without acrimony) should have been free to do so. Mark

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p><img src="http://popforum.net/images/smiles/icon_no.gif">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>It doesn't seem to me that there is too much dispute about the fact that every grading company makes mistakes. I am pretty well aware that happens. <br />For that reason, I really don't need to see a 50 post thread every time such a mistake is discovered. If it is something really major and important, OK. If the grader who screwed up doesn't make it right, OK. But otherwise, this stuff simply makes me tired.<br /><br />Start a grading company permanent screw up thread if you want. Everyone who wants to can then chime in about how bad whatever the screw up is and everyone else can avoid the thread. I would vastly prefer that to having a bunch of people shooting at each other on a number of threads.<br /><br />As far as the CU thing goes, I am somewhat on the fence. I personally am not a member of CU and could care less about their squabbles. I don't like the fact that when a member of CU gets booted off, he comes over here to bitch. However, I like even less the fact that other members of CU follow him over here to continue the fight. In my view, that is generally not a positive insofar as this board is concerned. For that reason, I also think you should exercise the moderator's privilege to lock/delete those threads with much more liberality in those circumstances than you do in most. I don't see this as a venue to continue arguments that have began elseswhere and which add nothing of value to this board. My two cents.<br /><br />Kenny Cole

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>No.<br /><br />Leon, I have no problem with the debates on grading (although they rarely stay civil for very long), but repeatedly starting new threads that say little more than "Grading services suck" serve little purpose in my eyes.<br /><br />And I still would like to see a photograph of Matt R. and Peter C. together. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jeffdrum</b><p>Leon,<br />Honestly I don't know or really care. I guess it is sort of like slowing down to look @ a car wreck. If they are allowed, is anybody who doesn't want to read them actually forced to do so?<br /><br />I say allow them, I think the fact that Matt had 4 threads going at once is more a function of his "unique" approach as opposed to anything that is likely to flourish. Most of us, pissed or not, show a little more restraint than that.<br /><br />Thanks for all you do.<br /><br />Jeff

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>As a long-time CU member and collector of select modern issues -- I certainly do not come to this board to read about or discuss those issues and am happy to have the line clearly delineated.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris East</b><p>Like has been previously voiced by a couple of posters in this thread, mine is a conditional vote: I vote "No- please put me out of my mysery and make it stop" But rather than the subject-matter, my vote is based on the manner in which the recent issue(s) has/have been presented.<br /><br />I think 3rd party grading issues are extremely relevant with regard to vintage cards, and I have learned a lot about different companies/cards from many posts over the years. Observations like about the '33 Goudey Lajoie, or the REA/Mastro/PSA Nodgrass, etc, are extremely informative and timely.<br /><br />But multiple threads on the same issue by the same poster is overbroad coverage. Had this been confined to a single thread...like the jaffe-Morales thread, I would feel differently. But at the time of my post 5 of the 15 most recent posts were started by a single username on the same subject.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Shawn</b><p>Which thread is more interesting? A thread with only one reply or a thread with 60 replies...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>I vote YES. It may get old but posts like the Nodgrass may help the grading companies make it right with the buyer who spent $10K on a doctored card with impossible back. I know the slabheads don't want to hear it but problems will happen no matter what, it is how they are handled after wards that makes a differences and PSA is terrible with customer service.<br /><br />I may be alone here once again but I notice that I get about 20 emails after everytime I post from old timers stating thanks Dan, you say what we think. Well guys, please speak up and help me once in awhile. I am horribly out numbered by these slabheads.<br /><br />As to CU issues I vote NO. As stated above by many, who cares.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tim Kinserlow</b><p>From my view, only one guy has stirred the pot with CU guys, and that was plifter. He came here bashing, once CU banned him for the same crazy stuff he does on here.<br /><br />If anyone wants to review the thread where it started, he taunted any CU members that had a problem with him, for them to come over here and say it. That is what snow-balled this whole drama.<br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Read above, my friend...this is what I said:<br /><br />"Don't worry if there are legit issues by others they will be let go"<br /><br />I think we are on the same page.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> The thinly veiled, personal agenda perpetuated by the poster has become stale. <br /><br />No need to exclude all Grading Co's vs. submitter topics however. Steve F

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>No.<br />As some others here have said, the issue is fine to bring up, but this obsessive method is not. In this particular case I feel someone with an axe to grind elsewhere is coming here to do his blind wholesale chopping. I haven't seen the likes of this since one of the Behren brothers blew a fuse re Chao and created all those threads! At least he had a sense of humor.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Lance</b><p>If you get a fool and a 6 pack together....you may have to Peter C. him. But, I don't see it as harmful to the board. I still can use self control NOT to open a thread I'm tired of looking at.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jerry Hrechka</b><p> No - Put these threads out of their misery. I come here to learn about vintage cards. Unless there is something new (Not endlessly rehashing the same stuff, restrict those threads.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>"Peter C" used as a verb. I love it! <br /><br />I can't stand the CU stuff -- just too much focus on silly PSA issues. The bigger PSA issues should be fair game but not this whiny low-rent stuff.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Alan U</b><p>Dr. No

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tim Kinserlow</b><p>Leon, <br /><br />Yes we are. Thanks again.<br /><br />Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>If you were answering the orginal question I think you are in the minority.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no<br />NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO <br /><br />Sorry Leon,<br />I couldnt resist!!!! 1 smiley for Peter C.... may he rest in peace... I believe MATT R may be joining him!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tim Kinserlow</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />I was meaning yes, I agree with what you said to me, we are on the same page.<br /><br />Sorry for the misunderstanding.<br /><br />Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ken Wirt</b><p>Probably a bit extreme to lock every thread involving squabbles between other forum members. Possibly something informative might come forth. But kicking a constant trouble-maker off the board (at least temporarily) when the situation clearly warrants it - that option should always remain on the table.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tim Newcomb</b><p>I agree with McKee <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Threads bashing grading companies should absolutely be allowed a lot of leeway here. This particular poster, however, may need reining in by the moderator.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Phil B</b><p>Yes and No<br /><br />Leon- I think there is a difference between bashing for the sake of bashing and questioning various practices of the grading services which may serve to educate and enlighten others. You should not hesitate to ban the purposeless bashing- but I think a fair questioning of authority is reasonable.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh</b><p>I say put an end to topics like the ones he starts. It is always something new with him. Stick to what the board is really meant for.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>fed.up</b><p>Peter C. is still around. He's been posting under the login of "howard385" for the past 6 months.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>ChuckMontoya</b><p> <br /><br />There is a big.... no Huge difference in someone being informative and someone who is in need of help. I think that most of us can tell the difference. This poster has gone far beyond informative.<br />It really is kind of sad. I hope that if my life ever gets to the place that I'm pounding a sixer and arguing a moot point on a sportcard forum, that those who care about me see that I get the much needed help required to once again have clarity of mind.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barry arnold</b><p>No<br /><br />all the best,<br /><br />barry

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Leon my vote is for you to do what you feel is best.<br /><br />Whatever you decide is good for me.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>John W</b><p>conditional no - situations can be questioned, but let's stop the junior high crap

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I'm with McKee and Newcomb.I think MUCH more space should have been allowed here. The references to Chao are ridiculous, IMO. Any shots at PSA are fair game and here's what I think happened:<br /><br />1. People are all wired about the various auctions and what's going on right now in the hobby, which is completely understandable;<br />2. OP is kind of a one-trick pony, but so what for now?<br />3. You may want to bash the OP for bringing his squabbles here, but I see no less blame for the followers and their "contributions" to this forum, whom are just as unfamiliar to me.<br />4. PSA bashing is OK by me-period and always. There will be some good things to say about them too--fair enough, let's hear it.<br />5. The topic is old and well known to all of us--but it's new to the OP, and would be very interesting on any given day, and do I dare say, would be given much more play if initiated by a "regular" poster.<br />6. The references to the Templeton as post-war is irrelevant and condescending, IMO.<br />7. You want new blood here--chasing them away like this does no good. At least OP had a Ruth Goudey to talk about--the CU enforcement squad seemed to offer zero in pre-war.<br />8. It's a little awkward to have basically strangers carry on their feud here, and it shouldn't be countenanced for any significant time. But let's allow a wide berth when it comes to free speech, whether it makes us comfortable or not.<br /><br />My two cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>No....................bashing and bitching serve no purpose.<br /><br />Kmac

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Cobby33</b><p>It's somewhat amusing, so limit to one thread at a time.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jantz</b><p>No

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony S.</b><p><br /> He has no intention, nor apparently the capacity, to play well with others. Please pull the cord.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>lol Ive never seen so many locked threads soon he will be 7 for 7.<br /><br />Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>B D</b><p>SGC bashing only<br />and talk of lost Magie cards!<br />that card was only VG anyway!!<br />DAN!<br><br>BcD <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>LetsGoBucs</b><p>Even though I don't buy graded cards and don't get cards graded....the fact of the matter is that a vast majority of pre-war cards sold are graded so I don't see how it can't be allowed. So I'm voting yes as one that probably only reads 1 out of ever 3 or 4 grading threads.<br /><br />That said, I would think that common rules of civility would prevail and simply stop the threads that turn into insult matches.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DMcD</b><p>Grading company threads: YES. It keeps them honest.<br />CU quarrels in our house: <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/Jan08/Machine_gun.gif"> NO!!!!! Fight someplace else.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>no this is a place to talk about cards. it amazes me how much time is spent discussing GRADES and it is always grading companies or cards already GRADED by the grading companies. why not just have a seperate net 54 section about graded talk like there is for post war baseball,boxing etc. i can guarentee it would be filled because these guys love to cry and boast about what grade their cards got. some threads such as the mastro goudey lajoie or the bad snodgrass threads are good here.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Any topic is fair game if it is handled intelligently.<br /><br />Unfortunately, many of these PSA bashing threads are not only repetitious, but involve two or more posters insulting each other. That's where it crosses the line.<br /><br />And when Matt P. offered his examples, they were nothing more than Topps cards from the 1980's. Those belong on the post-war board.<br /><br />I think the CU board is a lot more contentious than this one, and it is inappropriate for a CUer who raves and rants, and ultimately gets kicked off that board, to come over here and continue his tirade. For that reason alone he should get the boot.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>I feel the need to clarify: When I compared Matt R. to the departed Peter C., it wasn't to suggest that posts questioning the grading companies are frivolous. I don't think that at all. I do think that Matt and Peter are joined at the hip in their tendency to start the same type of threads (no matter the subject) over and over again after being asked by the moderator to back off a bit.<br /><br />I still find it puzzling how some folks on this board seemingly have allowed graded cards to take away most of their enjoyment of the hobby and how their hatred of graded cards sometimes seems downright unhealthy, but that doesn't mean I think that posts that attempt to hold the professional graders accountable should cease.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Phil Garry</b><p>No

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>It's sort of weird but this has turned into an interesting thread to read....in a socialistic sort of way. Thanks for the input. As it went along more and more of the argumentative threads got locked...I think I understand what the board wants...pretty much what I want too..thanks again

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Grading is one of the biggest "players" in this hobby, touching nearly all hobbyists in one way or another even if only to affect prices. I find starting threads on grading much more appropriate and global to the hobby than starting a boatload of "I found another reprint on ebay" threads. On the other hand, if a new grading thread was started every time someone was mad at a grade or found some ticky-tack little oversight, then it would become like the reprint on ebay crap - whiny-ass, as someone upthread called it. But for larger mistakes and broader topics (like the Freddy M thread in which he shows grounds for complete lack of trust in the whole grading process) it is a valuable part of this board. <br /><br />I think that Matt R was okay in what he was doing except for starting a new thread in areas where he should have just added posts. It's clear from his starting threads like "there will be evidence tonight" and then "here is the evidence" that he just putting items related to the same string of content in the wrong places. A simple correction? I don't know. But he also seems to be trying to contribute meaningfully - and in ways unrelated to PSA - in other threads so maybe this is just lack of familiarity with "how it works here" rather than an attempt to take over the first page with a single topic.<br /><br />Finally, I'm with Todd S on this one. I put just as much blame on whoever followed him over here from CU to jump every thread, and even every post he made to tell everyone that he's a jerk. I think it made this a much bigger issue than it otherwise would have been. It's like being in a nice quiet restaurant and suddenly having a bar brawl break through the wall from next door. Toss them all if it doesn't stop now.<br /><br />So let the grading company posts stay. And no Matt shouldn't be starting a new thread every time he sees one little thing related to his favorite bashing subject. And all the CU guys, including Matt, need to leave the feud over there. <br /><br /><br />J

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rawn Hill</b><p>If you are not happy with grading, simple, don't get them entombed. <br /><br />NO.<br /><br />Rawn

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Joann,<br /><br />"Poor" Matt R had to keep starting new threads! All his old ones seem to keep getting locked!<br /><br /><br /><br />Leon, <br /><br />My vote is "no". Discussions about grading are fine, in general. More than a couple of posts to complain about a grade (or in this case, a grade he didn't get) are childish. Posts about 1980's Topps cards should get the heave-ho. However, posts made after a six-pack should be constitutionally protected as comedy. <br /><br /><br /><br />Question for the veterans of the board,<br /><br />What is the record for most threads locked by one poster and is there an over/under line on this guy? <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>We are on the same page, I didn't mean to make it seem that we weren't. I think if you read through this thread, most are on the same page. rawjaws and slab-a-phobs alike, we all need to keep up with the good things the grading companies do as well as the bad. And I think most of us realize that mistakes will be made, and hopefully handled properly. Take care my friend, Dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Joann made a good point that I agree with completely. Grading is the hot button issue in our hobby today. It has become very hard to function at any meaningful level without using the grading services, and yet we are nearly all in agreement the product they offer is inadequate, at times woefully so.<br /><br />I suspect that if the graders improve the quality of their work, this issue will become less important. Nobody would be complaining if they looked at a stack of cards and felt that everything was graded correctly. There is still a long way to go for that.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p><P>Yes. The squabbles help me identify personalities.&nbsp; If we keep squashing voices, it makes it hard to decifer the nuances of each poster.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Identifying posters by personalities like, "loves PSA, HATES PSA, Loves RAW cards", etc. you can use this to guage the validity of a post. </P><P>&nbsp;</P><br><br>martyOgelvie<br />nyyankeecards.com

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>David G</b><p>Any thread that encourages posts of Tom Brady or Garry Templeton cards does not belong on this board.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brad L.</b><p>I don't see the point of keeping threads around that bash one particular grading company over and over (or any other grading company for that matter) because of an "experiment" when everyone knows that every grading company makes mistakes and slabs trimmed/altered/fake cards. <br /><br />It seems that this is a pretty isolated incident with one member making numerous posts and trying to start controversy in an unhealthy manner. Other than that, these boards seem calm and relevant to the topics (believe it or not, so are the CU boards when trolls aren't starting flame wars). So in that respect I don't see what value has been added with the recent posts by "plifter." If you feel the need to complain about a grading company fine, but threads that are over the top and obsessive don't add anything IMO.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joseph Shirley</b><p>I feel ligitimate discussions and opinions about grading standards of the third party grading companies are important and valuable. However, mean spirited bashing, just for the sake of bashing or getting everyones tail feathers up, serves no real purpose and somewhat hurts the reputation of this forum.<br />I spend quite a bit of time lurking and reading threads both at CU and here. After having to weed through all the BS threads at PSA and PCGS forums, I always look forward to reading most of the treads here. On the most part they are very informative for me, and the standards for the most part seem pretty high. I hope you can keep it up, as I know it is a never ending task trying to maintain a quality forum.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>"I can't stand the CU stuff -- just too much focus on silly PSA issues. The bigger PSA issues should be fair game but not this whiny low-rent stuff." - Jeff L. <br /><br />I agree 100% - No to petty bickering, yes to the tangible stuff. <br /> <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Cat</b><p>No

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Agreed -- once it is petty bickering and not tangible it's/they gotta go.<br />Not to defend the madness, but to Matt R's credit he did finally begin a credible thread on Conquering Cobb.