New Member Saying Hello: Banned From PSA Forums This Morning

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Welcome to the "I've been banned by PSA Club". My question is, what took you so long?

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by KingKongBundy

I took a look at the 1970 Topps population report for PSA 10 graded cards. As of today, there are 1414 PSA 10 graded cards out of a total population of 147485 1970 Topps cards graded by PSA.

In the OP's post, I counted 52 1970 Topps cards that received a 10 and I assumed that out of the cards that didn't get assigned a 10 in the submission, 3 of those cards were 1970 Topps.

As such, it would be interesting to calculate the probability that out
of 55 1970 Topps cards submitted, what is the likely-hood that that 52 would be graded PSA 10 assuming 'everything being equal'.

(Back of the envelope calculation ~ 10^-101).

Basically, you have a better chance of winning the powerball lottery 11 times in a row than receiving the grades received in the submission for the 1970 submission alone.

Charles

I was a Math major and have always enjoyed statistics and probabilities but I was never trained in the Back of the envelope technique. The calculation looks about right to me. Nothing better then a few numbers to back up claims.

I also checked the list of 1979s and can't find Bo Derek. I believe that was the year she got her 10.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Welcome to the "I've been banned by PSA Club". My question is, what took you so long?

I think there are many who consider it a badge of honor.

[jhs5120]

That's a very nice gift from PSA. Over $200,000 in cards that otherwise would be worth $40.

He must be a VERY good customer.

[glynparson]

Are we positive this was not a crossover of SGC 98's or something like that explaining the skipped numbers? I still think this would be an amazing number of crossovers but looking at who the submitter is it is definetly not out of the question these cards could be crossovers? Just a possible theory before we are 100% sure it was nefarious. Of course I still probably could not get that number on crossovers.

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by glynparson

Are we positive this was not a crossover of SGC 98's or something like that explaining the skipped numbers? I still think this would be an amazing number of crossovers but looking at who the submitter is it is definetly not out of the question these cards could be crossovers? Just a possible theory before we are 100% sure it was nefarious. Of course I still probably could not get that number on crossovers.

I would think if it were as simple as that, someone might've stepped in and said so, rather than delete everything and start banning. I could be wrong though..

Saying so would've made for great damage control, but instead the deletions and bannings only drive the conspiracy theories...

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by CW

1. This seller has a top notch eye for condition and has a huge pool of cards from which to select, and only sends in the best of the best.

I can see how certain submitters have a better eye for grades. But what would the reason be to reject a "9" for these cards? Certainly worth the grading fee as well.

[lsutigers1973]

Forgot I wasn't banned form this board.....yet.

For the few that keep defending PSA, this has been going on since they opened. My first PSA ID was banned 7 or 8 years ago for a long winded post about bulk submitters.

Yes it is possible that someone sent in 10-20,000 cards and asked for only 10's to be slabbed. PSA does this all the time and sends back the ungraded cards at little or no charge. I received an order years ago from a bulk submitter who shall remain nameless and they had accidentally slipped in a copy of a lengthy PSA order similar to this one. They even requested that the non-10s be held until they had a certain amount of ungraded cards to be shipped at once. So much for anonymity.

I also do not believe anyone here has mentioned how hard it is to get a 10 on many of these cards and issues. The cached thread that went poof stated that the 74-75 hockey only had 74 PSA 10s ever before this order that had 15 out of 16 submitted receive a 10.

[jhs5120]

Here is Joe Orlando's response on the CU forum:

It has come to my attention that, over the weekend, a couple of message board users began posting conspiracy theories about a particular order, questioning PSA’s grading process and so forth.

First, we have warned message board users in the past about posting conspiracy theory-type comments and/or ones that can be construed as unfounded bashing. We will not tolerate that kind of behavior. It is unhealthy for the community and the hobby, not to mention flat out wrong.

Second, in this particular case, a user was complaining about a series of PSA cert numbers on an order and questioning how the entire series was nothing but PSA Gem Mint 10s. The insinuation was that the submitter was getting some sort of preferential treatment on the grades, resulting in the excellent results for the customer.

In other words, in the mind of the conspiracy theorist, there was simply no possible way someone could get an order like that without something fishy going on.

Here’s the deal and it’s very simple. Though rare, some customers choose to only have certain grades encapsulated and processed on large orders. For those who are familiar with the concept, you might think of this as setting a “minimum grade” for the entire order of cards.

As a result, the only cards that actually receive a cert number are the ones that the customer would want in the PSA holder. For example, if someone submitted 1,000 cards but only 213 of the graded PSA Gem Mint 10, all that is visible in the system are the 213 cards that met the minimum grade under this arrangement.

From a cert number standpoint, all you can see are 213 consecutive PSA Gem Mint 10s, but you cannot see the other 787 cards that were evaluated but didn’t make the grade or the cert stage so to speak. That is the customer’s choice, as long as they pay our required fees.

That is why the orders, from a distance, can look the way that they do.

So, once again, for those of you who want to post nonsense on our message boards, you will be removed immediately. If something comes up in the future and a person has a question about anything at PSA, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask that you contact us so we can simply answer the question.

Most situations like this can be avoided by simply communicating before posting harmful, unfounded lies.

Our message boards were not designed to allow these types of people to act in this manner and we will defend it aggressively.

Sincerely,

Joe Orlando
President

[ethicsprof]

barry s,
the only time i've ever been banned was from the interstate fair for one day
for winning too many stuffed animals.
I wear that badge proudly---except at academic conferences.
all the best,
Barry

[pepis]

The fact is someone pointed out a sub that produce 576 psa 10s and the fact is that is extraordinary so naturally people are going to coment some wondering nature some conspiracy nature that's normal BUT when PSA bords take down
threads and band people from their bords for being normal THEY ARE CLEARLY
SAYING WE ARE GUILTY BUT WE HAVE THE POWER TO HIDE IT now if it is all
legit make public that would be the correct PR move not posting what is obiously a stupid attempt of PR dammage cotrol actions speak lauder than
words and Mr orlando (psa) your actions tell the REAL STORY.
Sincerely one well experined dude that can't be fooled Pepe

[x2drich2000]

I appreciate Joe's response, however, it seems to me that his explanation goes against the process presented in their video and on their website. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0Mqn...nXh2Q&index=11. Note step two indicates that a sticker is placed on the cardsaver of each card submitted and the sticker includes the order number and individual certificate number (time 1:15-1:35). This takes place before the card is ever looked at to be graded. Therefore, how would they know which cards did not meet the minimum grade and skip those without being reviewed by a grader first?

DJ

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by DavidG1966

...but they aren't at PSA or at the submitter. They are clearly NOT fools.

We raw guys disagree. We (at least I) find this thread extremely entertaining.

Doug

[conor912]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

I appreciate Joe's response, however, it seems to me that his explanation goes against the process presented in their video and on their website. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0Mqn...nXh2Q&index=11. Note step two indicates that a sticker is placed on the cardsaver of each card submitted and the sticker includes the order number and individual certificate number (time 1:15-1:35). This takes place before the card is ever looked at to be graded. Therefore, how would they know which cards did not meet the minimum grade and skip those without being reviewed by a grader first?

DJ

I agree and you are 100% right, but we all know that's not how it works.....You own a grading company. You have a customer that subs 1000+ cards at a time. It is against the financial interest of your company (a publicly traded company with shareholders, no less) NOT to give him preferential treatment. To put it another way, I work in a restaurant. If we started putting our VIP regulars at the tourist tables by the door, they would stop coming and become a regular somewhere else.

Oh, and your company "sets" thes values of its own cards....if that doesn't define "conflict of interest", I don't know what does. I think maybe I'll write my own price guide that only includes everything I own.

[novakjr]

The ?AUTH and other no grades are proof that Joe is full of it with that response. The serial numbers are given out beforehand, and are sequential based on their order before grading, regardless of whether or not they are ultimately slabbed... Luckily we see these all the time on the bay..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1915-Joe-Jac...p2047675.l2557

[Sean1125]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I think there are many who consider it a badge of honor.

I will now think of it as such.

Thank you.

[DavidG1966]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Here is Joe Orlando's response on the CU forum:

It has come to my attention that, over the weekend, a couple of message board users began posting conspiracy theories about a particular order, questioning PSA’s grading process and so forth.

First, we have warned message board users in the past about posting conspiracy theory-type comments and/or ones that can be construed as unfounded bashing. We will not tolerate that kind of behavior. It is unhealthy for the community and the hobby, not to mention flat out wrong.

Second, in this particular case, a user was complaining about a series of PSA cert numbers on an order and questioning how the entire series was nothing but PSA Gem Mint 10s. The insinuation was that the submitter was getting some sort of preferential treatment on the grades, resulting in the excellent results for the customer.

In other words, in the mind of the conspiracy theorist, there was simply no possible way someone could get an order like that without something fishy going on.

Here’s the deal and it’s very simple. Though rare, some customers choose to only have certain grades encapsulated and processed on large orders. For those who are familiar with the concept, you might think of this as setting a “minimum grade” for the entire order of cards.

As a result, the only cards that actually receive a cert number are the ones that the customer would want in the PSA holder. For example, if someone submitted 1,000 cards but only 213 of the graded PSA Gem Mint 10, all that is visible in the system are the 213 cards that met the minimum grade under this arrangement.

From a cert number standpoint, all you can see are 213 consecutive PSA Gem Mint 10s, but you cannot see the other 787 cards that were evaluated but didn’t make the grade or the cert stage so to speak. That is the customer’s choice, as long as they pay our required fees.

That is why the orders, from a distance, can look the way that they do.

So, once again, for those of you who want to post nonsense on our message boards, you will be removed immediately. If something comes up in the future and a person has a question about anything at PSA, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask that you contact us so we can simply answer the question.

Most situations like this can be avoided by simply communicating before posting harmful, unfounded lies.

Our message boards were not designed to allow these types of people to act in this manner and we will defend it aggressively.

Sincerely,

Joe Orlando
President

In Mr. Orlando's open reprimand of ME and my fellow conspiracists who were selectively banned he says we should call if we have questions. Well, I have PLENTY of questions for Mr. Orlando. I have left voice messages for Mr. Orlando. My voice mails have yet to be returned. I am sure he's just a very busy man and will get back to me in a reasonable amount of time. Could someone with access to Mr. Orlando please let him know I am waiting for his call. I would greatly appreciate it!

Thanks!!

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by DavidG1966

In Mr. Orlando's open reprimand of ME and my fellow conspiracists who were selectively banned he says we should call if we have questions. Well, I have PLENTY of questions for Mr. Orlando. I have left voice messages for Mr. Orlando. My voice mails have yet to be returned. I am sure he's just a very busy man and will get back to me in a reasonable amount of time. Could someone with access to Mr. Orlando please let him know I am waiting for his call. I would greatly appreciate it!

Thanks!!

Hey don't worry. He's been a busy man. You know, removing cards that didn't meet the minimum grade requirements, and then re-assigning serial numbers. Who'd have known it would be more efficient and cost-effective to serial number an entire submission twice..

[Leon]

I can't explain the 10s better than Joe or anyone else. That being said I think he and PSA do a good job overall. I am sure he looks into issues such as was pointed out with that submission. I don't believe he intentionally does anything wrong though with any large company there can always be an employee not playing by the rules.

[DavidG1966]

Originally Posted by novakjr

Hey don't worry. He's been a busy man. You know, removing cards that didn't meet the minimum grade requirements, and then re-assigning serial numbers. Who'd have known it would be more efficient and cost-effective to serial number an entire submission twice..

I called again and got through. I was told Mr. Orlando is out of the office today.

[insidethewrapper]

It only takes a few of the right cards graded "10" instead of "9" to make someone a millionaire and give the grader some kickback money. This grading situation is just to tempting for graders not to make a lot of money on the side.
Now the labels have what collection they come from "Dmitri Young", etc.

[calvindog]

Imagine that, someone thinking a conspiracy could exist around the grading of a PSA card. Mike O'Keeffe should write a book about such a crazy concept.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Here is Joe Orlando's response on the CU forum:

It has come to my attention that, over the weekend, a couple of message board users began posting conspiracy theories about a particular order, questioning PSA’s grading process and so forth.

First, we have warned message board users in the past about posting conspiracy theory-type comments and/or ones that can be construed as unfounded bashing. We will not tolerate that kind of behavior. It is unhealthy for the community and the hobby, not to mention flat out wrong.

Second, in this particular case, a user was complaining about a series of PSA cert numbers on an order and questioning how the entire series was nothing but PSA Gem Mint 10s. The insinuation was that the submitter was getting some sort of preferential treatment on the grades, resulting in the excellent results for the customer.

In other words, in the mind of the conspiracy theorist, there was simply no possible way someone could get an order like that without something fishy going on.

Here’s the deal and it’s very simple. Though rare, some customers choose to only have certain grades encapsulated and processed on large orders. For those who are familiar with the concept, you might think of this as setting a “minimum grade” for the entire order of cards.

As a result, the only cards that actually receive a cert number are the ones that the customer would want in the PSA holder. For example, if someone submitted 1,000 cards but only 213 of the graded PSA Gem Mint 10, all that is visible in the system are the 213 cards that met the minimum grade under this arrangement.

From a cert number standpoint, all you can see are 213 consecutive PSA Gem Mint 10s, but you cannot see the other 787 cards that were evaluated but didn’t make the grade or the cert stage so to speak. That is the customer’s choice, as long as they pay our required fees.

That is why the orders, from a distance, can look the way that they do.

So, once again, for those of you who want to post nonsense on our message boards, you will be removed immediately. If something comes up in the future and a person has a question about anything at PSA, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask that you contact us so we can simply answer the question.

Most situations like this can be avoided by simply communicating before posting harmful, unfounded lies.

Our message boards were not designed to allow these types of people to act in this manner and we will defend it aggressively.

Sincerely,

Joe Orlando
President

This answer fails to explain why there are cert numbers with no cards listed. I also fail to see the logic in not getting 8's and 9's holdered since the service was already paid for. Hmmmmm......

[drmondobueno]

Joe Orlando is the President of a for-profit company traded on a stock exchange. Or am I wrong? It has been both my misfortune and pleasure to work in a different and dissimilar industry dominated by one company which had both followers and detractors. To expect a company man to do anything but defend company turf and reputation would be unreasonable. To expect a reasoned response from a certain point of view is another. To refer to conspiracy theorists can be called spin. I call it fact spun in a web of company crap. Don't know the man and am now pretty sure I do not want to.

Just my opinion.

Keith temple

[DavidG1966]

Originally Posted by CW

Yes, according to one of the threads that got zapped, this seller is known for having a good eye and submitting cards with minimum grade requirements of 10. Knowing this, I think we have 3 distinct possibilities, 2 of which concern me as a collector who buys graded cards (the final two). I can't say which scenario is the truth, but all 3 are possible...

1. This seller has a top notch eye for condition and has a huge pool of cards from which to select, and only sends in the best of the best.

2. This submitter gets preferential treatment and higher grades than you or I would get for the same cards.

3. The cards being submitted are being cut from a sheet in a way that PSA can't detect or PSA no longer has the expertise or time to detect and reject. The submitter themselves may not be doing the cutting, and may have no knowledge of it.

These are not accusations -- merely discussing the possibilities. That is an amazing submission result, to say the least!

€hû¢k Wölƒƒ

Let's give Mr. Orlando and his posse the benefit of doubt for discussion sake. I still can't believe we are able to discuss things here! Red Rover Red Rover let the rest of the PSA membership board come over!

Anyway... Just for discussion purposess toss out all the holes and inconstancies in his post that people are talking about here for a minute. In Mr. Orlando's multi purpose post he fails to address option #3 above.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by CW

I can't say which scenario is the truth, but all 3 are possible...

1. This seller has a top notch eye for condition and has a huge pool of cards from which to select, and only sends in the best of the best.

2. This submitter gets preferential treatment and higher grades than you or I would get for the same cards.

3. The cards being submitted are being cut from a sheet in a way that PSA can't detect or PSA no longer has the expertise or time to detect and reject. The submitter themselves may not be doing the cutting, and may have no knowledge of it.

Hmmmm. Let's think about this. Which one is most likely if PSA is deleting every thread on the subject?

Jeff Payne

[mcadams]

Although the 1,000 card order was explained (sortof), the bigger issue was not. What does it mean when a seller on Ebay (who subs their own product to PSA) sells cards in PSA 10 holders and those cards have noticeable flaws that warrant a PSA 8 holder? Should we all turn a blind eye? What about the 2nd or 3rd time we notice it? Should we not ask questions then?

I'd love for anyone at PSA to explain how this happens. And don't try the "the grader must have missed one line". Address the fact that the much of the rumor in the marketplace is around only a small handful of sellers.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Here is Joe Orlando's response on the CU forum:

It has come to my attention that, over the weekend, a couple of message board users began posting conspiracy theories about a particular order, questioning PSA’s grading process and so forth.

First, we have warned message board users in the past about posting conspiracy theory-type comments and/or ones that can be construed as unfounded bashing. We will not tolerate that kind of behavior. It is unhealthy for the community and the hobby, not to mention flat out wrong.

Second, in this particular case, a user was complaining about a series of PSA cert numbers on an order and questioning how the entire series was nothing but PSA Gem Mint 10s. The insinuation was that the submitter was getting some sort of preferential treatment on the grades, resulting in the excellent results for the customer.

In other words, in the mind of the conspiracy theorist, there was simply no possible way someone could get an order like that without something fishy going on.

Here’s the deal and it’s very simple. Though rare, some customers choose to only have certain grades encapsulated and processed on large orders. For those who are familiar with the concept, you might think of this as setting a “minimum grade” for the entire order of cards.

As a result, the only cards that actually receive a cert number are the ones that the customer would want in the PSA holder. For example, if someone submitted 1,000 cards but only 213 of the graded PSA Gem Mint 10, all that is visible in the system are the 213 cards that met the minimum grade under this arrangement.

From a cert number standpoint, all you can see are 213 consecutive PSA Gem Mint 10s, but you cannot see the other 787 cards that were evaluated but didn’t make the grade or the cert stage so to speak. That is the customer’s choice, as long as they pay our required fees.

That is why the orders, from a distance, can look the way that they do.

So, once again, for those of you who want to post nonsense on our message boards, you will be removed immediately. If something comes up in the future and a person has a question about anything at PSA, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask that you contact us so we can simply answer the question.

Most situations like this can be avoided by simply communicating before posting harmful, unfounded lies.

Our message boards were not designed to allow these types of people to act in this manner and we will defend it aggressively.

Sincerely,

Joe Orlando
President

This seems to be a common accusation meant to discredit individuals who question questionable things or situations, to call them "conspiracy theorists" or to call something a "conspiracy theory". And to say "these types of people", as though people who question things that don't make sense are some kind of sub-human species, that don't have a right to question something that is going on. Sounds familiar. Question everything.

Sincerely, Clayton

[jefferyepayne]

I heard a conspiracy theory once that there was a guy who cut and trimmed a Wagner t206 and then convinced a brand new grading company to give it a grade it didn't deserve so he could sell it for a boatload of money.

Anyone know anything about this conspiracy theory?

jeff

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jefferyepayne

I heard a conspiracy theory once that there was a guy who cut and trimmed a Wagner t206 and then convinced a brand new grading company to give it a grade it didn't deserve so he could sell it for a boatload of money.

Anyone know anything about this conspiracy theory?

jeff

I've heard that one.

I'll take a moment to thank Leon for letting people discuss issues openly and not making threads go "pooof"

Sincerely, Clayton

[Bocabirdman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Go raw; it's more fun and you won't get a hernia lifting a 500 card set.

You know, I collect raw and I am always trying to amass reasons not to slab and the sheer weight never dawned on me. Let's say a collector has 25000 raw cards and 25000 slabs. The raw cards would be a pain to move..The 25000 slabs would be painful to move.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Imagine that, someone thinking a conspiracy could exist around the grading of a PSA card. Mike O'Keeffe should write a book about such a crazy concept.

Originally Posted by Bocabirdman

You know, I collect raw and I am always trying to amass reasons not to slab and the sheer weight never dawned on me. Let's say a collector has 25000 raw cards and 25000 slabs. The raw cards would be a pain to move..The 25000 slabs would be painful to move.

25000 slabs would weigh about 1500 pounds. No, seriously...1500 pounds. That's enough weight to possibly require extra structural support to whatever room they reside in.

[mark evans]

I don't know if anything fishy going on with PSA submission (it certainly looks suspicious), but deleting threads and banning folks who wish to discuss the issue speak volumes negatively about the company in my view.

I concur with others in expressing appreciation of Leon and other moderators who allow free discussion of controversial subjects, including at times this Board.

[TNP777]

Originally Posted by mark evans

I don't know if anything fishy going on with PSA submission (it certainly looks suspicious), but deleting threads and banning folks who wish to discuss the issue speak volumes negatively about the company in my view.

This is the thing that drives me nuts about this situation. JO (or one of his minions/employees) should have addressed this publicly as soon as P_P's sub was publicly exposed. Deleting and banning doesn't quell thoughts of conspiracy/cover-up... it pours gallons of kerosene on an already raging fire.

The other thing that has always galled me is the fact that nobody there knows who the moderating team is. It was weeks to months after the fact that everyone became aware the Carol was gone. Now there's a Jackie, but she's got PMs blocked. So if we have a question, who exactly are we supposed to go to? Call JO? Sure, that'll work. The moderating team needs to be public and interactive. I've been on probably a couple dozen message boards over my years on the interwebs, and I've always known who was in charge.

[CW]

3. The cards being submitted are being cut from a sheet in a way that PSA can't detect or PSA no longer has the expertise or time to detect and reject. The submitter themselves may not be doing the cutting, and may have no knowledge of it.

Originally Posted by DavidG1966

Anyway... Just for discussion purposess toss out all the holes and inconstancies in his post that people are talking about here for a minute. In Mr. Orlando's multi purpose post he fails to address option #3 above.

My guess is "Mum's the word" on that topic.

Specific to this option, it will be interesting to see if and when any of the OPC cards come to market. Will we see the typical rough cuts found on cards from this company (especially from early to mid-70s OPC), or will all the edges be smooth?

20813312 1977 O-PEE-CHEE STEVE CARLTON GEM MINT 10
20813313 1979 O-PEE-CHEE JOHNNY BENCH GEM MINT 10
20813316 1980 O-PEE-CHEE RON GUIDRY GEM MINT 10
20813317 1980 O-PEE-CHEE NOLAN RYAN GEM MINT 10
20813447 1971 O-PEE-CHEE RUSS NAGELSON GEM MINT 10
20813448 1971 O-PEE-CHEE BOB ROBERTSON GEM MINT 10
20813482 1974 O-PEE-CHEE GARNET BAILEY GEM MINT 10
20813483 1974 O-PEE-CHEE CRAIG RAMSAY (GRAIG) GEM MINT 10
20813484 1974 O-PEE-CHEE TOM BLADON GEM MINT 10
20813485 1974 O-PEE-CHEE NORM GRATTON GEM MINT 10
20813487 1974 O-PEE-CHEE DWIGHT BIALOWAS GEM MINT 10
20813488 1974 O-PEE-CHEE DON SALESKI GEM MINT 10
20813489 1974 O-PEE-CHEE REY COMEAU GEM MINT 10
20813490 1974 O-PEE-CHEE RON HARRIS GEM MINT 10
20813491 1974 O-PEE-CHEE DETROIT RED WINGS CHECKLIST GEM MINT 10
20813492 1974 O-PEE-CHEE GREG BODDY GEM MINT 10
20813493 1974 O-PEE-CHEE DOUG HORBUL GEM MINT 10
20813494 1974 O-PEE-CHEE LARRY ROBINSON GEM MINT 10
20813495 1974 O-PEE-CHEE BOBBY ROUSSEAU GEM MINT 10
20813496 1974 O-PEE-CHEE NOEL PRICE GEM MINT 10
20813497 1974 O-PEE-CHEE LYLE MOFFAT GEM MINT 10

[Mrvintage]

Here you go........


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-O-PEE-C...item35c33fdfd1

[DavidG1966]

Originally Posted by TNP777

This is the thing that drives me nuts about this situation. JO (or one of his minions/employees) should have addressed this publicly as soon as P_P's sub was publicly exposed. Deleting and banning doesn't quell thoughts of conspiracy/cover-up... it pours gallons of kerosene on an already raging fire.

The other thing that has always galled me is the fact that nobody there knows who the moderating team is. It was weeks to months after the fact that everyone became aware the Carol was gone. Now there's a Jackie, but she's got PMs blocked. So if we have a question, who exactly are we supposed to go to? Call JO? Sure, that'll work. The moderating team needs to be public and interactive. I've been on probably a couple dozen message boards over my years on the interwebs, and I've always known who was in charge.

Call JO?

I called him 3 times today. I was told on the 3rd call that he wants in today.

Who's in charge?

The last 'Named' mod I received an email from was Jackie. My most recent emails have been from an unnamed mod. Rumor going around the PSA boards is that there is a mod who is a member. This rumored mod is supposedly the one who gets things deleted in the middle of the night and on weekends and holidays. The conjecture is this is a well known not universally like member. I am just relaying what is talked about in the shadows on the PSA boards because people are afraid to talk in the open over there. I think you are correct. The lack of transparency over there only leads to background whispering making conjecture the only thing possible.

BUT who is ultimately in charge. Generally, in any business the person responsible for EVERYTHING is the boss and the bosses boss or bosses. Blaming a low level staff member is BUSH! (not that you were blaming anybody for anything)

Thank you Leon for making discussion possible here! Seriously!!!!!

[TNP777]

David, I've been the recipient of one of those anonymous "stop it, or else" emails. It was a result of running afoul of a CU member who used to refer to himself as "we" and "us", but has now dropped that nonsense. I could talk long and loud about this particular member, but it serves no purpose here. I do not think this particular member is the moderator, as the followup emails I had with the anonymous CU employee made it clear that they were aware he was sort of a PITA.

I pointed out in my recent CU post that the only two employees that have publicly posted on the SC&MF recently were "JackieC" and "LauraR", who both started Announcement threads in October. Neither of them have their PMs turned on.

[DavidG1966]

Originally Posted by TNP777

David, I've been the recipient of one of those anonymous "stop it, or else" emails. It was a result of running afoul of a CU member who used to refer to himself as "we" and "us", but has now dropped that nonsense. I could talk long and loud about this particular member, but it serves no purpose here. I do not think this particular member is the moderator, as the followup emails I had with the anonymous CU employee made it clear that they were aware he was sort of a PITA.

I pointed out in my recent CU post that the only two employees that have publicly posted on the SC&MF recently were "JackieC" and "LauraR", who both started Announcement threads in October. Neither of them have their PMs turned on.

I get what you are saying and again there should be a lot more transparency on those boards. That way the members wouldn't have to discuss things in the shadows. And when they reach a boiling point and spill into the boards you end up with the President of the company coming on and publicly calling CUSTOMERS conspiracists.


But I think we are getting off the point here. Did you see this amazing submission! Its just spectacular! And to put ALL questions to rest Mr. Orlando personally vouched for it!!! That should mean something!

20813173 1978 TOPPS MIKE SCHMIDT GEM MINT 10
20813174 1978 TOPPS PETE ROSE GEM MINT 10
20813175 1986 TOPPS NOLAN RYAN GEM MINT 10
20813176 1986 TOPPS NOLAN RYAN GEM MINT 10
20813177 1968 TOPPS DAVE JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813178 1968 TOPPS DICK DIETZ GEM MINT 10
20813179 1968 TOPPS CECIL UPSHAW GEM MINT 10
20813180 1968 TOPPS RON SANTO ALL STAR GEM MINT 10
20813181 1974 TOPPS CATFISH HUNTER GEM MINT 10
20813182 1974 TOPPS MICKEY RIVERS GEM MINT 10
20813183 1974 TOPPS ED BANE GEM MINT 10
20813184 1979 TOPPS KIKO GARCIA GEM MINT 10
20813185 1979 TOPPS JAMIE QUIRK GEM MINT 10
20813186 1970 TOPPS ED BRINKMAN GEM MINT 10
20813187 1970 TOPPS ANDY KOSCO GEM MINT 10
20813188 1970 TOPPS DANNY CATER GEM MINT 10
20813189 1970 TOPPS FELIPE ALOU GEM MINT 10
20813190 1970 TOPPS AL JACKSON GEM MINT 10
20813191 1970 TOPPS RON BRYANT GEM MINT 10
20813192 1970 TOPPS BILL RIGNEY GEM MINT 10
20813193 1970 TOPPS JERRY MAY GEM MINT 10
20813194 1970 TOPPS WILLIE STARGELL GEM MINT 10
20813195 1970 TOPPS VADA PINSON GEM MINT 10
20813196 1970 TOPPS PHILLIES TEAM GEM MINT 10
20813197 1975 TOPPS MINI GENE MICHAEL GEM MINT 10
20813198 1975 TOPPS MINI STOLEN BASE LEADERS B.NORTH/L.BROCK GEM MINT 10
20813199 1975 TOPPS MINI EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ GEM MINT 10
20813200 1975 TOPPS MINI SANDY ALOMAR GEM MINT 10
20813201 1975 TOPPS MINI DAVE PAGAN GEM MINT 10
20813202 1975 TOPPS MINI STEVE FOUCAULT GEM MINT 10
20813203 1975 TOPPS MINI JERRY TERRELL GEM MINT 10
20813204 1975 TOPPS MINI TONY TAYLOR GEM MINT 10
20813205 1975 TOPPS MINI DOYLE ALEXANDER GEM MINT 10
20813206 1975 TOPPS MINI DON WILSON GEM MINT 10
20813207 1975 TOPPS MINI JOHN LOWENSTEIN GEM MINT 10
20813208 1975 TOPPS MINI RANGERS TEAM BILLY MARTIN, MGR. GEM MINT 10
20813209 1975 TOPPS MINI BREWERS TEAM DEL CRANDALL, MGR. GEM MINT 10
20813210 1972 TOPPS DENNY LEMASTER GEM MINT 10
20813211 1972 TOPPS GENE MAUCH GEM MINT 10
20813212 1972 TOPPS DENNIS HIGGINS GEM MINT 10
20813213 1972 TOPPS PAUL SPLITTORFF GEM MINT 10
20813214 1972 TOPPS JOE LAHOUD GEM MINT 10
20813215 1972 TOPPS TOMMY DAVIS GEM MINT 10
20813216 1972 TOPPS JOHN BATEMAN GEM MINT 10
20813217 1972 TOPPS DEL UNSER GEM MINT 10
20813218 1972 TOPPS LEO DUROCHER GEM MINT 10
20813219 1972 TOPPS TONY CLONINGER GEM MINT 10
20813220 1972 TOPPS MIKE JORGENSEN GEM MINT 10
20813221 1972 TOPPS DUKE SIMS GEM MINT 10
20813222 1972 TOPPS BOB JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813223 1972 TOPPS MANNY SANGUILLEN GEM MINT 10
20813224 1972 TOPPS BOB BARTON GEM MINT 10
20813225 1972 TOPPS JERRY JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813226 1972 TOPPS NL PITCHING LEADERS GEM MINT 10
20813227 1969 TOPPS PHILLIES ROOKIES R.STONE/B.WILSON GEM MINT 10
20813228 1969 TOPPS JIM PALMER GEM MINT 10
etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc...

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Mrvintage

Here you go........


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-O-PEE-C...item35c33fdfd1

what does that card book for raw? a nickel?

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by DavidG1966

I get what you are saying and again there should be a lot more transparency on those boards. That way the members wouldn't have to discuss things in the shadows. And when they reach a boiling point and spill into the boards you end up with the President of the company coming on and publicly calling CUSTOMERS conspiracists.


But I think we are getting off the point here. Did you see this amazing submission! Its just spectacular! And to put ALL questions to rest Mr. Orlando personally vouched for it!!! That should mean something!

20813173 1978 TOPPS MIKE SCHMIDT GEM MINT 10
20813174 1978 TOPPS PETE ROSE GEM MINT 10
20813175 1986 TOPPS NOLAN RYAN GEM MINT 10
20813176 1986 TOPPS NOLAN RYAN GEM MINT 10
20813177 1968 TOPPS DAVE JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813178 1968 TOPPS DICK DIETZ GEM MINT 10
20813179 1968 TOPPS CECIL UPSHAW GEM MINT 10
20813180 1968 TOPPS RON SANTO ALL STAR GEM MINT 10
20813181 1974 TOPPS CATFISH HUNTER GEM MINT 10
20813182 1974 TOPPS MICKEY RIVERS GEM MINT 10
20813183 1974 TOPPS ED BANE GEM MINT 10
20813184 1979 TOPPS KIKO GARCIA GEM MINT 10
20813185 1979 TOPPS JAMIE QUIRK GEM MINT 10
20813186 1970 TOPPS ED BRINKMAN GEM MINT 10
20813187 1970 TOPPS ANDY KOSCO GEM MINT 10
20813188 1970 TOPPS DANNY CATER GEM MINT 10
20813189 1970 TOPPS FELIPE ALOU GEM MINT 10
20813190 1970 TOPPS AL JACKSON GEM MINT 10
20813191 1970 TOPPS RON BRYANT GEM MINT 10
20813192 1970 TOPPS BILL RIGNEY GEM MINT 10
20813193 1970 TOPPS JERRY MAY GEM MINT 10
20813194 1970 TOPPS WILLIE STARGELL GEM MINT 10
20813195 1970 TOPPS VADA PINSON GEM MINT 10
20813196 1970 TOPPS PHILLIES TEAM GEM MINT 10
20813197 1975 TOPPS MINI GENE MICHAEL GEM MINT 10
20813198 1975 TOPPS MINI STOLEN BASE LEADERS B.NORTH/L.BROCK GEM MINT 10
20813199 1975 TOPPS MINI EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ GEM MINT 10
20813200 1975 TOPPS MINI SANDY ALOMAR GEM MINT 10
20813201 1975 TOPPS MINI DAVE PAGAN GEM MINT 10
20813202 1975 TOPPS MINI STEVE FOUCAULT GEM MINT 10
20813203 1975 TOPPS MINI JERRY TERRELL GEM MINT 10
20813204 1975 TOPPS MINI TONY TAYLOR GEM MINT 10
20813205 1975 TOPPS MINI DOYLE ALEXANDER GEM MINT 10
20813206 1975 TOPPS MINI DON WILSON GEM MINT 10
20813207 1975 TOPPS MINI JOHN LOWENSTEIN GEM MINT 10
20813208 1975 TOPPS MINI RANGERS TEAM BILLY MARTIN, MGR. GEM MINT 10
20813209 1975 TOPPS MINI BREWERS TEAM DEL CRANDALL, MGR. GEM MINT 10
20813210 1972 TOPPS DENNY LEMASTER GEM MINT 10
20813211 1972 TOPPS GENE MAUCH GEM MINT 10
20813212 1972 TOPPS DENNIS HIGGINS GEM MINT 10
20813213 1972 TOPPS PAUL SPLITTORFF GEM MINT 10
20813214 1972 TOPPS JOE LAHOUD GEM MINT 10
20813215 1972 TOPPS TOMMY DAVIS GEM MINT 10
20813216 1972 TOPPS JOHN BATEMAN GEM MINT 10
20813217 1972 TOPPS DEL UNSER GEM MINT 10
20813218 1972 TOPPS LEO DUROCHER GEM MINT 10
20813219 1972 TOPPS TONY CLONINGER GEM MINT 10
20813220 1972 TOPPS MIKE JORGENSEN GEM MINT 10
20813221 1972 TOPPS DUKE SIMS GEM MINT 10
20813222 1972 TOPPS BOB JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813223 1972 TOPPS MANNY SANGUILLEN GEM MINT 10
20813224 1972 TOPPS BOB BARTON GEM MINT 10
20813225 1972 TOPPS JERRY JOHNSON GEM MINT 10
20813226 1972 TOPPS NL PITCHING LEADERS GEM MINT 10
20813227 1969 TOPPS PHILLIES ROOKIES R.STONE/B.WILSON GEM MINT 10
20813228 1969 TOPPS JIM PALMER GEM MINT 10
etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc...

Mr. Orlando vouched for it. What a guy.

[CW]

Originally Posted by Mrvintage

Here you go........


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-O-PEE-C...item35c33fdfd1

Not the best scan, but to be fair, left and right edges both look fairly rough. That card actually looks like a solid 10, not sheet cut, all things considered.

[D. Bergin]

As somebody who has never sent in anything for grading, I'm blown away by what some of these "10's" go for.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1962-CIVIL-W...p2047675.l2557

[mintacular]

#1 we all would love a truly objective way to quantify a cards' condition, etc. yet this cannot exist and psa like any other co. is an imperfect co. to offer such a service

#2 joe sounds very defensive which indicates he is trying to hide something

#3 card grading can allow one to miss the point of collecting in the first place i.e over-emphasizing condition rather than the subject of the card

[E93]

If you are selling PSA 10's, get a decent scanner!
JimB

Originally Posted by Mrvintage

Here you go........


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-O-PEE-C...item35c33fdfd1

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by mark evans

I don't know if anything fishy going on with PSA submission (it certainly looks suspicious), but deleting threads and banning folks who wish to discuss the issue speak volumes negatively about the company in my view.

I concur with others in expressing appreciation of Leon and other moderators who allow free discussion of controversial subjects, including at times this Board.

+1

I would think rather than deleting threads, banning folks, and after the fact making a statement that reeks of disrespect, it'd make more sense to leave the thread up and address the issues openly to his board members (and customers). I think the questions sounded legitimate, from what's been posted here.

Sincerely, Clayton

[Prof_Plum]

Originally Posted by E93

If you are selling PSA 10's, get a decent scanner!
JimB

That would only make sense if you're under the impression that people are buying the card, not the holder. Just think how many more PSA10's you could get graded at the cost of a good scanner.

[frankbmd]

I'm sure the purists on the board crack open all their PSA 10 holders so they can feel the cards.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by E93

If you are selling PSA 10's, get a decent scanner!
JimB

But it's a PSA 10, so it HAS to be perfect, therefore you don't even NEED a scan...

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by mintacular

#3 card grading can allow one to miss the point of collecting in the first place i.e over-emphasizing condition rather than the subject of the card

amen...