I stumbled across a blog last night called "For the Love of Cards", and under the links section, one of the destinations was listed as "t206museum.com is a fraud". I found this surprising, as the few times I had visited the site, it appeared on the surface to be quite helpful. Naturally my curiosity was piqued, so I Googled the site name to see what discussions might have occurred on our forum. Without going into great detail, as longtime members of Net54 already know this, the owner of the site was exposed trying to sell previously undiscovered variations of T206 Old Mill backs that he himself completely fabricated. The sordid details can be found in a discussion I bumped last night, if anybody is interested.
I am not creating this discussion and poll to rehash the past, however. This is merely an example of a site that has been associated with criminal behavior. What I am proposing here is that we as a group become more proactive in documenting the names, user ids and websites of those unscrupulous persons who infect our hobby. I believe that knowledge is power, and collectively, we already make a difference by exposing unethical people within the hobby. A list simply makes these names more easily accessible.
One area I would like to address is Ebay, as I have seen several discussions lamenting the insufficiency of their feedback system. Since it is impossible to leave negative feedback on a buyer, honest sellers are precariously placed in harm's way. Unless a seller delves deeply into the comments left for previous transactions, they cannot know if the person they are shipping to is trustworthy. A searchable list of problematic buyers, with a link to any discussion providing supporting documentation, would represent a big step forward. The user ids of buyers with excessive retractions, and a history of shill bidding, should be included as well. As for sellers, negative feedback, though indicative of a
possible problem, is simply not always accurate. A buyer can leave negative feedback without even contacting a seller, whether it is warranted or not. It would be wise for us to keep a list of sellers that do not meet the level of honesty the hobby deserves.
In the "Joseph M. Pankiewicz" discussion, Pete Ullman made a comment that has stuck with me for much of the last week:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ullmandds
Maybe there should be a section in the archive on this site that discusses suspect sellers/auction houses. Maybe a timeline of hobby indescretions over the last decade up to present...naming names...so users of this message board will have such info to help with future transactions?
|
http://net54baseball.com/showthread....174608&page=30
The responses to his post were positive, yet I have not seen this idea acted upon yet. So I am going to build upon his idea, expanding it to Ebay users, auction houses, and suspicious websites. This would serve as a
caveat emptor of sorts. The ultimate decision of who would appear on the list would be made by Leon or one of the other forum admins/moderators.
So, I ask you, my fellow friends and hobby enthusiasts, if you feel this list would be beneficial?