Think whatever you want, but base it on facts.

Any evidence you have to refute any claim that has been made would be welcome. A logical argument at least would also be welcome.

We should cut them some slack, after all being a PWCC shill is a very difficult task these days ;)

It's interesting, for years, people vehemently defended PWCC. One "The Scandal" really came to light, virtually nobody did. Now, people seem to be doing so again, or at least in the lukewarm sense of claiming it's all an unproven conspiracy theory, or saying they're no worse than everyone else in the hobby, etc.

Good, so people should also quit using the US postal service that delivers their mail, find out who they buy office supplies from so everyone can boycott them, shut off/cancel their gas, water, sewer, electricity if they currently get any of these utilities from the same provider PWCC gets their utilities from, immediately close out and move any and all accounts/funds they have from whatever bank(s) PWCC also uses, find out if PWCC uses PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, or any other payment services as part of their business, and if so, everyone else should immediately discontinue using those services, and so on. And every employee of PWCC should be shunned and scorned by family and friends, and denied help and service from any and all other companies, stores, and businesses, to the point that no grocery store will ever sell them food for themselves and their families, and no doctor will even take them on as a patient.

Oh, and I'm forgetting the best example of all, PWCC's attorney(s), both in-house and external, if applicable, should be disbarred permanently for daring to work with and represent a known criminal enterprise. In fact, based on your logic, any attorney ever representing any criminal or criminal enterprise should probably be immediately and permanently disbarred.

And I can easily extend your logic even further. Since it is an indisputable fact that a portion of current practicing attorneys make money off of representing known criminals and criminal enterprises, it is an additional fact that other attorneys, like yourself for example, are well aware of that, yet allow such criminally involved/associated attorneys to belong to the same Bar Association and related organizations as the rest of you licensed attorneys. And because all attorneys get support and resources from the Bar and related organizations, why do all the non-criminally involved/associated attorneys allow those attorneys representing criminals to belong to the same organizations as them, interact with them, help support and at least indirectly supply them with resources they then can use on behalf of criminals, and so on? Even though you may not be doing any of that directly yourself, why aren't you actively seeking to have these criminally involved/associated attorneys removed from such organizations or disbarred? And absent being able to, or having no success in doing so, why haven't you instead removed yourself from the Bar, and any other of these organizations, so you aren't potentially tainted by some direct/indirect affiliation, enabling, or interaction with these criminally associated attorneys?

And by the way, I like the Star Wars reference, even though it's a little bit out there. But let me add a more real world twist to your question of a moral dilemma. Instead of the Death Star, you're looking at a WW II concentration camp in Poland, and a local civilian is conscripted and put to work in the camp and ordered what to do. He sees and is aware of what is being done, but shuts up and does as he is told. Even though he has not had his life directly threatened, he has a wife and small children outside the camp he still needs to be around for to look after and support. The war ends and years later he's suddenly accused and brought up on war crimes charges. So, is he guilty, or should he have risked getting shot and killed by not following orders while working at the camp, and leaving his wife and children to fend for themselves? Decisions aren't always so crystal clear, are they? And we both know that regardless of how you would answer this moral dilemma question, there will be a group out there somewhere that would vehemently attack and seek to discredit you if they were aware of how you responded and had a ready platform to come after you on.

And along the lines of coming after someone, I'd be more cautious about that very last statement you posted, "CSG deserves scorn and a consumer boycott.", especially on a public forum like this which directly interacts with and is followed by numerous businesses and individuals that could all be potential CSG customers. I think we both know it wouldn't be impossible to dig up at least a few of your legal brethren who would be happy to come after you for making that libelous statement about boycotting CSG, if they thought they could get a pay day (and I'm not talking candy bars) out of it. Especially since CSG has been neither accused nor convicted of any crimes or misdeeds that I'm aware of, and though they have been accused, PWCC has never (at least not yet) to my knowledge been formally charged or convicted of any crimes or misdeeds either. I believe your profession still follows the "Innocent till proven guilty in a court off law." mantra, right? And the fact that, to my knowledge, you are not also publicly calling out for a consumer boycott of any other individuals or enterprises currently or previously engaged in business in some way with PWCC would on the surface seem to indicate you are specifically targeting CSG, and CSG alone, with your statement. The legal profession is one I feel truly does not always embrace and adhere very well to the old adage and concept of, "Honor among thieves."

This behavior is why, personally, I think the best detective work was the work on modern cards that are serial numbered. The unique serializing makes it entirely undeniable that these cards were, in fact, the exact same card and clearly trimmed. Which is probably why we see nobody actually challenge the evidence itself, simply throw absurd illogical statements around and try to lump in the documentation of PWCC's guilt with conspiracy theories. When you got nothing else to throw, throw bull!@#$

Well we got through 104 posts before Godwin's law was proven yet again.

Repeating what I said in another thread as it seems relevant here.

Keep in mind that with strict rules of evidence and a very high burden of proof, not all crimes can be successfully prosecuted in court. At one point Brent Huigens was a cooperating witness and his rumored decision not to cooperate may have changed the prosecutor's calculus. If indeed this is all over from the criminal justice angle, and we don't know that, I think evidentiary considerations likely were more the reason than either the FBI or the prosecutor considering this unimportant. Prosecutors only like to pursue cases they feel they have a strong chance of winning. The evidence in the court of public opinion is quite different from what is admissible in court. They couldn't just put up screenshots of Blowout threads.

All speculation of course.

__________________

That law goes all the way back to the early usenet groups if memory serves.

dumb question. How long (without the additional delaying effects of a pandemic) did the investigation of Mastro take? Doug Allen? Operation Bullpen? Was there a point in those investigations where people were like "see they didn't do anything because they haven't been charged and it's been 'X' amount of time"???

I looked it up, it goes back to 1990 in usenet groups apparently. I don't remember hearing it until the mid 2000's.

Yeah human nature being what it is, it probably came up in the first controversial thread ever.

It was apparently three years after the FBI was seen at the 2009 National that Mastro and Allen were indicted. Presumably the investigation was then necessarily longer than that (source: https://sportscollectorsdigest.com/c...-fraud-charges). It was 3 more years, I 2015, that he was sentenced.

Mastro I believe closed down in 2009 and was indicted in 2012. The recent indictment for autograph fraud concerned activities several years before. Sometimes these things do take time. Again, I have no knowledge at all about the investigation of PWCC etc. etc.

Seriously, I would love to read some of the first public chat board threads in internet history. I imagine little has changed, except we have more developed memes now.

Here goes my productivity for the week.

Yup, people back then claimed they were right and rudely shot down others. Not much has changed apparently.

Still waiting for you to provide a single shred of evidence or a coherent logical argument. Still waiting for you to show me where anyone said that PWCC is the "sole actor" committing fraud.

Geez, Bob, talk about going far afield...the Holocaust, really? Not a good thing to put into a friggin' card thread, and I am not going to respond to it substantively. I used Star Wars as an example to try and keep it in the realm of inoffensive fiction.

As for attorneys, there are indeed people out there who believe that suspected criminals should not get a defense, or even a trial. Just take 'em out and shoot 'em. Fortunately, our Constitution's Bill of Rights differs. Everyone is entitled to a defense as a right, and that means someone has to do the defending. Me, personally, I did not want to do that sort of work so I am strictly a civil practitioner, but I understand and respect the Constitutional role that criminal defense attorneys have in our system. If PWCC and/or its principals are indicted, they too will be entitled to the best defense they can procure, and I do not begrudge them their defense or their day in court. That said, I don't want to defend them and would not sign on to defend an adjunct civil case against them if asked. Unlike an accused criminal, no one is entitled to a graded card. No one's liberty is threatened if a card gets graded or not.

CSG has decided to take on PWCC's baggage by partnering with it. That is their choice. I can choose where to spend my hobby money. I choose not to buy from PWCC because of their history and the likelihood that I will get a doctored card. I also can choose not to do business with CSG as a result.

The basic issue you raise is contextual. Nuance. Not something Americans do well. Should a conscript refuse to serve? Depends on what is being asked and what is being threatened. Muhammad Ali was willing to go to prison over his objections to being drafted. Some consider that an unforgivable breach of duty to the country; others consider it a justified refusal to violate his religious beliefs. Both answers are right and both are wrong, depending on the context. Refusing to serve in Vietnam is far different than refusing to serve in WWII. Context.

PWCC has been represented by counsel since the beginning of The Scandal.

Yes, by really good counsel. And they are entitled to the defense.

No question. Imagine this country without the right to counsel and to a trial by jury.

Each of us hoping that none of our cards ever spent time with PWCC before we owned them...

Attachment 514765

What I just don’t understand is why they’ve become the easy target here. When others do shady things it’s passed off like oh I’d trust him with my wallet. Probably a bunch of people that would trust the pwcc head with their wallet. Just always thought it was curious that pwcc is the chosen mark.

Are you seriously trying to equate REA with PWCC, Brian Dwyer with Brent Huigens? OMG if so. People have answered the why question repeatedly and you're just not listening to the answer.

Not equating those two but use them as an example - you know them both personally or worked for them?

I have had many direct interactions with Brent over the years by email and occasionally by phone, many involving questioning him about altered cards, relationships with card doctors, and so forth. I've posted many of the responses over the years. I don't know Brian well but I've known him somewhat since he was a kid on a nonpublic message board I used to belong to. My most recent dealing with Brian was letting him know, the day of the most recent auction, that a card was bad and despite the late notice it was taken down before the close.

Any attempt to equate the two is beyond ridiculous.

It has been explained to you several times already. Your continued implication that REA is on PWCC’s level you have refused to back up though.

The PWCC shills used to be a lot better.

Just seems like you were quick to judge the extended auction handling as no big deal. Like I’ve said before, seems like pwcc can do no right and others can do no wrong. Not black and white.

Internet bully. Probably got picked on in high school.

Their software was obviously malfunctioning. It was like 1AM. I am sure it was extremely stressful. He made a decision. Like you would have made a better one? And you want to equate that with PWCC who is or was under federal investigation and who initially was a cooperating witness meaning their intent was to plead? Please. Why you are committing to this is way beyond me.

The decision point is where you seem to be giving a free pass. Don’t run an auction with bad software. If pwcc did the same - and never consigned or sent anything to the vault - you guys would have been all over it as fraud.

You're insane. I've defended Brent here on certain things and said publicly one of the Cortney Delorme texts people go gaga about didn't mean much of anything. I have no bias.

I didn't even go to a high school. Calling you out on your lies you can't even attempt to backup is not exactly bullying. How about you provide evidence for your claims?

+1

My claim is you guys seem to throw pwcc under a bus all the time and pass on others. What evidence can I give you? It’s just what I’ve read.

Also, lies? Chill

Where is your evidence REA has been doing what PWCC is? Put up, or shut up comes into play at some point. You keep hurling implication at people and groups and refuse to back them up again and again.

CSG is going after market share and public acceptance so the more of their cards out in the market and the more that start to circulate thru the auction houses the more they will be accepted, thought about and used. PWCC gives them a steady flow of cards to accomplish to get themselves established.

If done right and if the prices stay steady or even increase but not dramatically then perhaps they think they can pickup more of the graded market as PSA and SGC and others rates are to high for many cards to be worth grading

I never said rea does what pwcc does. Chill. And don’t tell me or anyone to shut up.

When you've refused to provide the evidence for your assertions of equal wrong doing over and over again, 'put up or shut up' is fair. You've refused to back up any of your claims, and lied about what people have said in this very thread.

Where did I say equal wrongdoing?

"For me, I just don’t understand why the claims agains pwcc gain more traction than those against others."

That sure sounds to me like you're saying equal wrongdoing, otherwise you would understand the difference in traction.

The recent REA auction getting extended for an entire day was an absolute bullshit move. I was high bidder on multiple listings at the time. The site was down for a few minutes. Maybe 10 minutes max. But then they kept draggin it on for hours while communicating to us buyers that we would have just 10 more minutes to put in our final bids. So they were squeezing every bit of juice they could out of it. Then after all of us were kept up for hours, checking our listings, they decided to extend it another day. It was absolutely a shitbag thing to do to the buyers and was 100% a money grab. Well, it worked. They got a lot more money (this time anyhow). But the lost a consigner in the process. I had 75k worth of cards that were previously heading their way, but are now going to Heritage instead.

That’s a fantastic reading.

Yeah but the auction head can handle your wallet if you want. He’s a good dude.

Yeah I'm just stupid, don't get the meaning of your crystal clear prose, and Greg is stupid too.

Don’t invent a straw man. You’re better than that.

In speaking with others who were bidding in that auction, this was their beef too. The connection might have been slow at various points but bids were being placed frantically, lots remaining open, bids being placed on them again for a considerable amount of time and then a notice sent that it was being extended after many people went all in to win. I have two friends who bid with REA and spend a good deal of money there who claim they will not be bidding again and have told the owner. Personally I think they will but I get how frustrating that must have been.