Is it ethical to alter cards and sell them without disclosure?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I am positive there is reasonable disagreement on edge cases.

Surely, if we dove deep enough, we could find a case of "robbery" where two reasonable men disagreed on if that particular case did or did not constitute robbery. Nonetheless, as reasonable men, surely we could reasonably say whether we are for or against "robbery" as it is generally understood by English speaking people to mean and has consistently been used.

While polls have 100 character limitations, even if I wrote a 300 page treatise we could surely find an example not covered and then use that as the angle to hem and haw.

I don't think, given the range of things that are done to cards, it's as clear cut as "robbery" for example.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I don't think, given the range of things that are done to cards, it's as clear cut as "robbery" for example.

What things done to a card that any significant part of the card-collecting population consider to be alterations are not, in fact, alterations and you should not disclose when selling a card?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

What things done to a card that any significant part of the card-collecting population consider to be alterations are not, in fact, alterations and you should not disclose when selling a card?

Personally I am OK with the two things I mentioned, and beyond that I would object with varying degrees of outrage. But I think more than a small minority of people are probably OK with smoothing out a paper lift, or pressing a surface wrinkle, and like it or not there is greater tolerance than I have for cleaning. Whether or not people think of these things as not alterations at all, or as alterations but OK ones, is a matter of semantics. But all that said, I think the poll would mean more if you had defined the term, rather than having a poll where one's definition of the term at issue might determine the answer. Just my two cents.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Personally I am OK with the two things I mentioned, and beyond that I would object with varying degrees of outrage. But I think more than a small minority of people are probably OK with smoothing out a paper lift, or pressing a surface wrinkle, and like it or not there is greater tolerance than I have for cleaning. Whether or not people think of these things as not alterations at all, or as alterations but OK ones, is a matter of semantics. But all that said, I think the poll would mean more if you had defined the term, rather than having a poll where one's definition of the term at issue might determine the answer. Just my two cents.

Personally, I get the same information from tallying the people who claim ignorance and pretend they can't say if alterations should or should not be disclosed because of some X or Y edgecase, the logic of which would not be used for any other kind of fraud or crime.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Options 2 and 3 are likely to include false positives in terms of what you are trying to get at -- people who think cleaning is not an alteration, would not disclose it, but are going to say they think true alterations should be disclosed.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Options 2 and 3 are likely to include false positives in terms of what you are trying to get at -- people who think cleaning is not an alteration, would not disclose it, but are going to say they think true alterations should be disclosed.

If I played this game, we would end up with the 300 page treatise and we would still not get 100% alignment on the exact edges - which is the whole reason this is the sophistry used by most of those who are in favor of frauds, it will never get to an actual decision.

It is being used in the common sense way it has been used in our hobby for three decades or more. I understand and expect the exact list of people who will use this as the angle to hem and haw and avoid clicking yes, but literally nothing will satisfy - there is always one more edge case.

As a common sense person I can say I am against X crime or think Y is fine, as it is generally understood by people who are not pretending they suddenly don't know what a term they have expanded long passages about before means, without going over every possible case of it to categorize if that exact case counts. It should be incredibly obvious that there are edge cases of disagreement; if it was something many of this boards members and friends did not profit from, people would be able to understand this.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

If I played this game, we would end up with the 300 page treatise and we would still not get 100% alignment on the exact edges - which is the whole reason this is the sophistry used by most of those who are in favor of frauds, it will never get to an actual decision.

It is being used in the common sense way it has been used in our hobby for three decades or more. I understand and expect the exact list of people who will use this as the angle to hem and haw and avoid clicking yes, but literally nothing will satisfy - there is always one more edge case.

As a common sense person I can say I am against X crime or think Y is fine, as it is generally understood by people who are not pretending they suddenly don't know what a term they have expanded long passages about before means, without going over every possible case of it to categorize if that exact case counts. It should be incredibly obvious that there are edge cases of disagreement; if it was something many of this boards members and friends did not profit from, people would be able to understand this.

From my observations over many years, there isn't as much consensus as you think there is. I think it's more complex than just positing there are a few edge cases but the rest is clear.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Options 2 and 3 are likely to include false positives in terms of what you are trying to get at -- people who think cleaning is not an alteration, would not disclose it, but are going to say they think true alterations should be disclosed.

I'm going to concur with Peter.

Even without a 300-page treatise, maybe just 5-10 examples of alterations (or activities that don't rise to the level of alterations) would be helpful.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

I'm going to concur with Peter.

Even without a 300-page treatise, maybe just 5-10 examples of alterations (or activities that don't rise to the level of alterations) would be helpful.

You are one of the, as of right now, three Yes votes, so you have already voted that alterations need not be disclosed, rather than pleading ignorance.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

You are one of the, as of right now, three Yes votes, so you have already voted that alterations need not be disclosed, rather than pleading ignorance.

Yep. I'm one of 3. Appreciate being outed, so thanks for that.

Full disclosure: I've never altered a card. Except for the one time when I bought a 71 Bazooka Numbered, which was hand cut. The cut job was bad, so I cleaned it up.

And I would argue that alteration is completely acceptable, without needing to be disclosed to a potential buyer. It's still in my PC, so I haven't sold it. But I will have no problem someday selling it without disclosing my hack job to the buyer.