Quote:
Originally Posted by jchcollins
Apologies, guess I'm wearing my realist cap today. That they are grossly (or maybe at least somewhat) incompetent is also something that is unlikely to ever change. If folks 2 years ago or so could not get on the bandwagon to force change after all the alteration / trimming, Moser-gate - then I have little faith that it will ever happen.
I don't like cards that are obviously altered, no, but the truth of the matter is that with most cards like those that come out of GWTS, many of us cannot tell the difference. Maybe it isn't that we shouldn't care - it's just that I don't see much room for change.
|
I agree that PSA is unlikely to become competent (or not corrupt, one can take their pick). Many people cannot tell the alterations.
But I don't think that is justification (very different from 'realistic'), and doesn't mean one shouldn't object to it. That the fraud goes undetected does not make it okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchcollins
...my understanding is that the large majority of cards he worked on did wind up grading fine with PSA and SGC afterwards. If it's really that untraceable, you have to be a purist several degrees further along the spectrum than I am I guess to object...
|
Your original argument here is not that it's realistic to acknowledge it will happen and the graders will certify them anyways. Your statement as written is that frauds (as not disclosing alterations is) that are not detected are unobjectionable. Getting away with the crime doesn't make it unobjectionable. Selling a knock off to someone they don't know isn't real and looks pretty close isn't alright. Many in the hobby clearly feel that any and everything is fine if it gets into a slab and PSA certifies the fraud, but I have a hard time seeing any ethical argument for the original statement.