pwcc

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

I don't know, but the obvious solution is that auction houses ought to disclose in their terms exactly which scanner it is that they're using and what exactly the settings are.

Or they could simply stop screwing around with the scans in an effort to hide the flaws of the cards they're selling.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Or they could simply stop screwing around with the scans in an effort to hide the flaws of the cards they're selling.

If they revealed which scanner/settings they were using, it would go a long way towards accomplishing that.

[calvindog]

I don't know any of my scanner settings -- but I know which cards I've tweaked to make them look brighter. This isn't rocket science. Brent knows exactly what he's doing.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I don't know any of my scanner settings -- but I know which cards I've tweaked to make them look brighter. This isn't rocket science. Brent knows exactly what he's doing.

Congrats on your 3,000th post.

There is no question that Brent knows what he's doing. And there's no question the other AH's do as well. It's a question of what we can do. It could be difficult to force the ones who are image editing to change. Constructive steps need to be taken. Auction houses that don't image edit can put that in their terms and it could be a boon to them. It shows that they have committed to a clean auction.

As for the ones that change their settings, we don't have to like it. But having them disclose it in their terms would still be a major step forward. Until this afternoon, not a single AH had confessed to changing scanner settings. Brent stepped forward and became accountable. That is much better than the mystery game we were playing previously. It doesn't make him a hero, but it is a big step.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Brent stepped forward and became accountable.

Respectfully, I disagree completely. Brent responded with a bullshit lie because he felt pressured to respond. Blaming it on our monitors? Please. For some reason my monitor works fine when viewing Rob Lifson's scans, not so fine when viewing Brent's.

[Republicaninmass]

Silence speaks volumes, I cant see how any real bidder could have more than one retraction. I have never had one!

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Respectfully, I disagree completely. Brent responded with a bullshit lie because he felt pressured to respond. Blaming it on our monitors? Please. For some reason my monitor works fine when viewing Rob Lifson's scans, not so fine when viewing Brent's.

Nevermind Brent, then - what do you plan to do about the problem? As far as I can tell, Jeff, you are long on complaints, as legitimate as they may be, and short on solutions. Whether Brent wins Boy Scout Trooper of the Year is not the issue - the greater issue is, how do we stop AH's from jacking up their scans?

[autograf]

You know.....you can pretty much say anything as long as you preface it 'respectfully' or 'in all due respect'.....

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Nevermind Brent, then - what do you plan to do about the problem? As far as I can tell, Jeff, you are long on complaints, as legitimate as they may be, and short on solutions. Whether Brent wins Boy Scout Trooper of the Year is not the issue - the greater issue is, how do we stop AH's from jacking up their scans?

How do the victims stop the fraud? Is that what you're asking?

Simple: we can make complaints to law enforcement or we can sue them. That's the only thing that seems to slow the fraud down it seems. Outing them here publicly just causes numerous sheep and others financially aligned with the crooked auction houses to jump up and try to silence those who point out the fraud. You should go look at the threads from 2006 and 2007 and see how many Net 54 stalwarts defended Doug Allen and Bill Mastro from fraud allegations.