Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy
If DT says that it can't be detected by a TPG, I take him at his word. Do you know of any cards a TPG has rejected as a result of DT's process? The cards seem to make it past PSA and SGC. If his process was being detected by TPGs, don't you think the word would get around and those that send him cards in hopes of better grades would stop doing so?
|
So you're saying then that if such work is undetectable, it is okay to do so without disclosure, even though a prospective buyer would regard such information to be material to his/her decision whether or not to purchase the card?
If the answer is yes, then I repeat what I said yesterday; the logical extension of this argument is that it is okay to create cards. I don't agree with you that that is something different. Both instances -- new creation and alteration of an existing card without disclosure -- involve withholding material information that a prospective buyer would reasonably want to know in deciding whether to purchase the item and how much to pay.
And, as to Peter's point that such an argument is analogous to saying what's wrong with robbing a bank if the crime is never detected, I agree.