The "auction" (for lack of a better word) is over. Look at what happened.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

David, Do you mean by allowing certain sellers to advertise here or by buying from them, or both. BTW I think I agree with you.

Hey Dave
Any time you don't like this place you can get the F--- out. It won't hurt my feelings.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Would it hurt your feelings if I stayed?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

Would it hurt your feelings if I stayed?

That worked well for ya'.

[Runscott]

...

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

David, Do you mean by allowing certain sellers to advertise here or by buying from them, or both. BTW I think I agree with you.

Don't make this argument about something it's not. Ebay is one thing and the board is another.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

Don't make this argument about something it's not. Ebay is one thing and the board is another.

Just in case you didn't notice, David won't be participating with us anymore. He had been banned once before for going completely ballistic with an extremely vile post towards me that stayed up for a few hours. He was gone for 6 mos to a year (or more) and pleaded to come back, so I said ok. Because of that he was already on a short leash. Now he is free to do what he wants, somewhere else.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

In my opinion, contributing to the profits of a company you know is acting unethically and breaking the law is by definition being unethical. You can tell me reasons why do it-- and maybe some of those reasons contain logic and sense and I can see your practical point of view--, but those are reasons for why you are acting unethically, not reasons for why it not unethical.

And I don't want to hear theoretical comparisons of buying baseball cards to procuring bread and eggs for your starving family from an ethically challenged food industry, because we're talking about baseball cards here, something you don't have to buy. And, besides, perhaps your food buying habits should be more influenced by ethics than it is.

And pointing out that others also act unethically is besides the point.

That's the way I see it. After reading the posts in the thread I certainly don't expect that everyone will agree with me.

I wouldn't go as far as David here, and I am sure I am not 100 percent consistent in life, but I do think just not doing business with people whose activities are highly suspicious is the right thing to do.

Some of the rationalizations I've seen here could be used to justify bidding in an Al Qaeda fundraiser. Then again, it wouldn't surprise me if people would do just that if they had that key card.

[drcy]

I'm neither a saint nor a zealot, though believe in calling a spade a spade. And sometimes people mistake an observation for an opinion.

My post on ethics was part personal value judgment and part logical explanation. It wasn't entirely my value judgment and certainly not a how to guide to collecting covering all ethical conundrums and gray situations, though my personal views were strongly implied.

I mean someone can agree with my definition of ethics, but think ethics are of lesser importance. I'm sure many unethical people consider themselves unethical. Some are even unapologetic about it.

[nolemmings]

Leon, with all due respect, you can shoot/ban the messenger, but I don't see how the question is invalid. Since we were just given an unsolicited opinion on who is acting ethically in the hobby, where it was suggested that any business contact with a company that itself is acting "highly unethically" and "breaking the law" (with an apparent inference that at least one and likely two specific ebay sellers identified in this thread qualify) is also unethical, how is it not fair to question the ethics of allowing these nefarious people to advertise here?

[MyGuyTy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Post of the year. My tears might be in Hawaii by now.

You got some fast moving tears! Next time you cry, PM me, I'm riding a tear to paradise

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by MyGuyTy

You got some fast moving tears! Next time you cry, PM me, I'm riding a tear to paradise

So, that would be two tickets to paradise?

[MyGuyTy]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

So, that would be two tickets to paradise?

Pack your bags, we'll leave tonight......

Scott commence the tears again!

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by MyGuyTy

Pack your bags, we'll leave tonight......

Scott commence the tears again!

I think I just got banned from Eddie Money concerts. I can live with that.

[steve B]

Umm......

If we need to abandon all contact with businesses that behave badly at times, we'll have to shut this whole thing down.

I can't think of any major computer industry company that hasn't been in legal trouble or that hasn't engaged in some questionable practices at some time.

And Then...............

I suppose going to shows is out. Since I'd have to get there by car. Which means using gas, and contributing to the profits of oil companies.

Perhaps if I became a hermit?

Ah, but I've done stuff in the past that I'm not exactly proud of.

If I'm withdrawing ALL contact, that's kind of a problem.


The high road is great, and we should try to stay on it as much as possible.
But taken to extremes it just isn't practical.

Steve B

[Leon]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Leon, with all due respect, you can shoot/ban the messenger, but I don't see how the question is invalid. Since we were just given an unsolicited opinion on who is acting ethically in the hobby, where it was suggested that any business contact with a company that itself is acting "highly unethically" and "breaking the law" (with an apparent inference that at least one and likely two specific ebay sellers identified in this thread qualify) is also unethical, how is it not fair to question the ethics of allowing these nefarious people to advertise here?

Todd, the question was perfectly valid, if you will notice I didn't ban him for questioning any advertising, questioning a seller, or what goes on on this board. Please look at the timing of posts carefully. Anyone can question anything, that is fine. I have no issue with the debate. What I have issue with is someone that was banned before, being given a second chance, and then taunting me about being on the board. I told him if he didn't like the board he can leave. That is true for anyone.. He has his moments but his sh** to equity ratio was poor. I have never banned anyone for questioning what goes on on the board. Now if someone is relentlessly attacking me, or someone else, and won't quit, then that might get them banned too. But his banning wasn't concerning his questioning of advertising..It was for screwing with me.

[Brian Van Horn]

Leon,

I see what you are saying on the behavioral aspect, but can we delete the profanity? I am not trying to be funny. It is obvious the guy got under your skin, but keep the foul language out of the conversation.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Leon,

I see what you are saying on the behavioral aspect, but can we delete the profanity? I am not trying to be funny. It is obvious the guy got under your skin, but keep the foul language out of the conversation.

Duly noted. I don't want to offend any members with my harsh language.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Umm......

If we need to abandon all contact with businesses that behave badly at times, we'll have to shut this whole thing down.

I can't think of any major computer industry company that hasn't been in legal trouble or that hasn't engaged in some questionable practices at some time.

And Then...............

I suppose going to shows is out. Since I'd have to get there by car. Which means using gas, and contributing to the profits of oil companies.

Perhaps if I became a hermit?

Ah, but I've done stuff in the past that I'm not exactly proud of.

If I'm withdrawing ALL contact, that's kind of a problem.


The high road is great, and we should try to stay on it as much as possible.
But taken to extremes it just isn't practical.

Steve B

Steve that's all true but it remains the case that if one believes someone selling baseball cards is not ethical, it's pretty simple not to do business with them instead of rationalizing it.

[Runscott]

...

[calvindog]

Guys, we have people here who think that even though they've been shilled they are not victims of fraud. This is a bigger issue.

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Guys, we have people here who think that even though they've been shilled they are not victims of fraud. This is a bigger issue.

Every member of this forum has been a victim of hobby related fraud in one way or another. We have all purchased cards off ebay and through auction houses. We have all been suckered into graded cards, or have been affected by the absurd price manipulation that comes with it. Every one of us has been duped one way or another - reprints, altered cards, forged autographs or general ebay scum. Each one of us is a victim of fraud, anyone with a card collection who says otherwise is delusional.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Every member of this forum has been a victim of hobby related fraud in one way or another. We have all purchased cards off ebay and through auction houses. We have all been suckered into graded cards, or have been affected by the absurd price manipulation that comes with it. Every one of us has been duped one way or another - reprints, altered cards, forged autographs or general ebay scum. Each one of us is a victim of fraud, anyone with a card collection who says otherwise is delusional.

Sad but true, but still, the fact that the sea is rough does not mean one should not try one's best to navigate it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Steve that's all true but it remains the case that if one believes someone selling baseball cards is not ethical, it's pretty simple not to do business with them instead of rationalizing it.

I'm not rationalizing, I try to avoid sellers I know are questionable. I also don't make much effort to investigate any particular seller. In that way I'm probably a small piece of the problem.

And I agree. Within a hobby it's easier to avoid questionable sellers.

It just struck me as mildly hypocritical for someone to say we should cut off all business with sellers who are known to at least ignore stuff like shilling. And to make that post from a computer or phone that's almost certainly got software form Microsoft(Antitrust, less than forthcoming at times) Apple (Production in factories with deplorable working conditions) Or Google (Copyright violation - many times over)

We all do business in some way with all of them.

To me the difference is that with the big corporations there isn't much choice.
And at least we can do that business knowing what sort of company we're dealing with.
I've bought from some flea market dealers I didn't trust. But did it knowing they were a bit sketchy, and made my decisions on the item at the time. There were a few I simply wouldn't bother with at all.
If you look hard enough at almost any seller there's something they've done that would bother someone. Maybe not criminal, but maybe not exactly "right" either.


I think others make some good points, fraud is here, and has been. And we probably can't stop it entirely. To think that I haven't been harmed indirectly by shilling in a major auction I don't buy from would be foolish. (Not directly since I can't afford the great stuff even unshilled) The rise in price of the good stuff raises the price of the cheaper stuff I can afford.

There are positive aspects to higher overall prices, but that's a bit too far removed from this discussion.

Pointing out fraud when it happens is a good thing.

Steve B

[Runscott]

...

[chernieto]

Originally Posted by steve B

I'm not rationalizing, I try to avoid sellers I know are questionable. I also don't make much effort to investigate any particular seller. In that way I'm probably a small piece of the problem.

And I agree. Within a hobby it's easier to avoid questionable sellers.

It just struck me as mildly hypocritical for someone to say we should cut off all business with sellers who are known to at least ignore stuff like shilling. And to make that post from a computer or phone that's almost certainly got software form Microsoft(Antitrust, less than forthcoming at times) Apple (Production in factories with deplorable working conditions) Or Google (Copyright violation - many times over)

We all do business in some way with all of them.

To me the difference is that with the big corporations there isn't much choice.
And at least we can do that business knowing what sort of company we're dealing with.
I've bought from some flea market dealers I didn't trust. But did it knowing they were a bit sketchy, and made my decisions on the item at the time. There were a few I simply wouldn't bother with at all.
If you look hard enough at almost any seller there's something they've done that would bother someone. Maybe not criminal, but maybe not exactly "right" either.


I think others make some good points, fraud is here, and has been. And we probably can't stop it entirely. To think that I haven't been harmed indirectly by shilling in a major auction I don't buy from would be foolish. (Not directly since I can't afford the great stuff even unshilled) The rise in price of the good stuff raises the price of the cheaper stuff I can afford.

There are positive aspects to higher overall prices, but that's a bit too far removed from this discussion.

Pointing out fraud when it happens is a good thing.

Steve B

well said

[chernieto]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Two problems with that statement: 1) if they want the card, they will rationalize a new definition for "ethical", or rationalize how the seller can't be proven to be unethical; 2) it's much simpler to rationalize a way to get something you want, especially if you have the power to make it happen, then to avoid the thing you want. It's what used to allow me to have a hamburger and beer as my pre-race meal. If I had been a vegetarian on ethical grounds, this example would have covered both of my points.

Yesterday you defended an ebay seller who is offering an old mill "brown"card for 2,500$ which many knowledgeable folks here called a black back. It seems to me that that listing is deceptive and unethical or worse. You seemed to have no problem rationalizing that the seller is actually honest and well respected and ethical.
I spent over an hour last night looking at old threads which try to prove out the shill bidding clearly because I tend to rationalize as well: I trust PWCC & Brent and don't believe he would ever ruin his reputation by allowing it to occur with his knowledge. I know cards I consigned were never shilled. And I have trouble seeing all unusual bidding is actually shill bidding. every ebay participant once had 0 feedback or low feedback. PWCC advertises more than most and it's hard to miss when he has 1 card closing every minute all night. I believe that attracts a lot of new ebay bidders. Some of us have strange bidding practices hitting the bid button a lot and looking for the current high bid. Bid retractions are to me inexplicable and clearly another story and not sure why ebay wouldn't suspend someone with more than a couple in a 30 day period.
Obviously shilling is wrong and illegal. I think trying to deceive buyers about a card and overcharging for it is equally wrong. Rationalizing stuff is human and we are all guilty of it as you said

[Runscott]

...

[chernieto]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Why are you following me from thread to thread? Your position on shilling was not supportable, so you followed me over to the thread on Irishhosta. Your position regarding that topic was also not supportable, so now you are back over here being a pain in my backside.

You, my friend, are on ignore. It's a small list, but you earned it.

I'm honored to make the list. I didn't realize you have an exclusive on the threads & I find it funny that you assume it means I follow you around because I would comment on another thread. I guess you don't see the irony in discussing others lapses in ethical behavior and rationalizing while supporting a "proven honest seller"" grossly misrepresenting a card . Your first comment to me is that I am blind because my opinion doesn't match yours. I believe my positions are supportable & your arrogance is not
With all due respect.
Paul C

[Runscott]

...

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Now we can get back to having an intelligent discussion.

And the arrogance continues.

[chernieto]

Scott,
Ethics and rationalizations aside I understand for some people ignoring points raised in a discussion rather than addressing differences is an easy route to take.

[Runscott]

...

[Runscott]

...

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

You, my friend, are on ignore.

Scott,

You and I have had some pretty strong disagreements, but we never put each other on ignore. I have never used that function at all (don't even know how). I find it kind of childish to ingore all posts of someone I disagree with. And though we disagree on some things, I still agree with you on a lot of other things. It's ok to disagree. You are one of my favorite posters on here. In fact, some of the people I've disagreed the most with are some of my favorite posters. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you can't respect their opinion if it differs from yours. That's just me, but even the people I disagree with still have valuable information sometimes, and why miss that?

DJ

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

And that's exactly what criminals like Bill Mastro think when they're engaging in their fraud: 'they want the card anyway, why is shilling it up a problem?' Hell, Bill still thinks that and he's cooperating with the Feds against other criminals in our hobby.

Jeff- I went back and re-read a statement I made in this thread and want to amend it here. I said to "just put a bid/snipe in and be done with it." I think that is still the case but it doesn't mean I WANT to pay that much if I don't need to, in a legal auction setting. I am not condoning, what looks to be, the fraud that we see going on with the bidding patterns and id's. I am not OK with getting ripped off. If I inadvertently stated otherwise then that was a mistake. If we see fraud going on then it is for the good of the hobby to expose it. Please keep doing what you are doing, but be nice .

[Sean1125]

[Runscott]

...

[drcy]

I don't think there are easy answers, especially when applying to the real world. I think there can be compromise and things are rarely black and white and the real world situations can be complex. If all pants makers are unethical, I don't expect you to walk around without pants. Realize I grew up in the Northern Midwest and it can get chilly here in Seattle too. I don't rank every misdemeanor as a felony, nor do I expect people to be Saints (Though, to be candid, I expect people to be good people. Sorry, but I don't give excuses for stealing money from honest people or lying in auction descriptions. Use your rationalizations on someone else).

But, while I think one's ethics can sometimes justifiably be compromised on occasion ("All food makers are unethical in some way, but I actually have to eat and already have a full time job and can't start my own farm. I have to make some sort of practical compromise"), if all it takes to toss out one's ethics is to get a kid's baseball card, that's pretty sad. If there is a is god as commonly described, I would imagine he doesn't forgive your sins because they were done in the pursuit of gathering baseball cards.

And I'm not telling you what your ethics should be. I'm not saying I have the universal definition and here is what the are. But, for a starting point, you should know what are your ethical beliefs. And you know what is right and wrong by your definitions and you should be aware when you are breaking your rules in the of baseball cards. You know when you are really just rationalizing, if to yourself more even than to others. You know when you are manipulating definitions to meet your card collecting aims.

You don't have to argue to me your points. You don't have to convince me of anything. You don't have to convince me that this or that offense is really just an ethical parking ticket not a felony, and you more than make up for it by being good to your family and giving to charity. But you should have the discussion with yourself. And, in the end, if you are breaking your personal ethical rules but honestly believe it's justifiable in the pursuit of baseball cards, that's the way it is. The discussion was with yourself, and my and others' opinions and belief systems are neither here nor there. We weren't even in the room to hear your points, much less offer opinions on them.

P.s. Don't call me holier than thou after I said my personal belief system was neither here nor there.

P.s.s. Or at least have the decency to say it behind my back and not to my face.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Steve yes you could by Socratic method push even the most ethical person to the point where he would have to admit that he is not being completely pure or consistent. But so what? That doesn't undercut the legitimacy of taking the obvious step of foregoing card purchases from known or strongly suspected fraudsters. It's like Robert Bork allegedly said -- just because there is a slippery slope doesn't mean you have to ski it to the bottom.

[nolemmings]

or someone like Todd who joins a fray just to pile-on because of past disagreements

I would ask you what the hell you are talking about, but that might imply I care.

[Runscott]

...

[nolemmings]

Oh you clever little bird--you know me so well. Blather on.

[Runscott]

...

[MyGuyTy]

[Runscott]

...

[nolemmings]

Scott, perhaps you could place me on your ignore list too. I welcome it actually-- it beats getting repeatedly skewered by your brilliant repartee.

[chernieto]

[QUOTE=Runscott;1274099]David, you are completely correct on all counts. But I have no idea why you think that I do not respect someone's opinion, or that I don't think others have the right to disagree with me. I completely respect ALL opinions on this forum. This particular thread is a bit different, in that we are talking about cheating, and whether or not it's okay. Having an opinion that cheating or stealing is okay, is a bit different from having an opinion that a card has been trimmed or that guns should be allowed in churches and bars. What I absolutely do NOT respect is a nit who uses 25% of his total posts to follow me around attempting to be a pain in my ass, or someone like Todd who joins a fray just to pile-on because of past disagreements. What do either of those situations have to do with 'opinion'? And how am I 'arrogant' for basically telling him to pound sand?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Usually when you call people blind, a nit they respond negatively. You address people respectfully they generally respond in kind. Not everyone has 6,500 posts...If you choose to judge a net54 member by the number of posts that's clearly your call...go right ahead. Don't insult me....Please leave me on your exclusive ignore list & enjoy life & try to insult less people.
Paul C

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by MyGuyTy

Hahaha! I could not have described this thread more eloquently myself.

[Runscott]

...

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Agreed



Fortunately, I hear an ambulance and an ice-cream truck, so that will leave me arguing with myself.

I don't get it.