[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by travrosty

when you issue an loa for an item and the loa says it was checked against exemplars, and then only after being caught, you pull the loa from the auction house due of a lack of exemplars, then is it a mistake?

how can i or anyone else make that "mistake"? it is the gravity of the 'mistakes' that is very concerning not the fact that one occasionally occurs. It's too many 'mistakes' and too many big mistakes that could have easily been caught to chalk up to JUST human error and not other factors like too few authenticators, authenticators authenticating out of their specialty. going too fast, too few/no exemplars.

A mistake occurs when you have all your ducks in a row, put forward your very best effort using all available resources at your disposal, and a mistake still occurs. Is this the case? you be the judge.

Once upon a time a guy posted a baloney jim corbett signature here and i said to myself, "it's obviously bad to someone with a lot of experience in boxing signatures, but i bet it gets either an abc or xyz cert."

sure enough in a few weeks, he posts it again with an xyz cert, and xyz company lists no boxing experts on their site. I knew it would happen and it did. How is that a classic definition of a mistake?

properly authenticating an autograph like that requires experience and preparation, neither of which was evidently executed in this case. If i dont know dentistry and someone comes to me with an abcess tooth and i pull the wrong tooth, did i just make a 'mistake'? well yes and no, but it's not a mistake that should have happened because I am not a dentist.

Some of these companies are authenticating autographs they have no business authenticating, and without the proper exemplars, staff and manpower, they set themselves up for their own failure. I didn't tell them to do it that way and the collecting public needs to know what is REALLY happening. You don't want people to know? you think they are doing great? please explain why you think that?

It's just the 100 WORST authentications by these companies, not all of them. It had to be pared down greatly to make 100, there were easily scores more that didn't make the final cut.

Geez, Travis, looks to me like a "misdirection ploy" by Nash to deflect his own issues in the hobby......

Oh that's right, Travis, it's only "misdirection" if someone posts a thread about Nash.............