John Rogers Home and Business Searched by the FBI

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by Runscott

15 posts and every last one of them relates to Peter Nash.

Seems like he owns you.

Scott no offense I wonder how laid back you would be with having been physically threatened, ripped off for huge amounts of money, given questionable or fake items for collateral on debts owed. All from a guy who pretends to be a hobby sleuth and savior, while yanking his pud in cyberspace and pointing out the whims and legal troubles of others while taking the 5th on his own.

I don’t think Nash “owns” Robert, more like he “owes” Robert money…if anything.

I think poking Rogers is fair if he’s so keen on Nash, and so quick to consign “memorabilia” to Coaches Corner…LOL.

Just my two cents there needs to be 1000 more posts on Nash the hobby needs to know what this guy is.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

Scott no offense I wonder how laid back you would be with having been physically threatened, ripped off for huge amounts of money, given questionable or fake items for collateral on debts owed. All from a guy who pretends to be a hobby sleuth and savior, while yanking his pud in cyberspace and pointing out the whims and legal troubles of others while taking the 5th on his own.

I don’t think Nash “owns” Robert, more like he “owes” Robert money…if anything.

I think poking Rogers is fair if he’s so keen on Nash, and so quick to consign “memorabilia” to Coaches Corner…LOL.

Just my two cents there needs to be 1000 more posts on Nash the hobby needs to know what this guy is.

Poking Rogers is definitely fair - the Rogers issues are news to many of us.

I see your point about Robert, but just so he understands - he is known to most (if not all) of us simply as "the guy who hates Peter Nash". That is a positive thing, but most of us who dislike Nash (myself included) aren't known here on a vintage baseball card discussion forum, simply for our hatred of someone. The only person who came close was Travis and his hatred of PSA and JSA, but at least we also knew him as the boxing autograph guy.

But it is Robert's right to inadvertently (or purposely?) label himself here based completely on his relationship to Nash. It is only tiresome to me because I have read most of his 15 posts, and I'm not seeing anything new. But again, that's his right.

Having said all that - sorry, Robert, if I vented unfairly. Please continue, and I sincerely hope you get justice. And if there is something related to the forum that you can contribute, I would love to read it - you sound like a guy who could turn some of that passion toward positive stuff that would be interesting.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Poking Rogers is definitely fair - the Rogers issues are news to many of us.

I see your point about Robert, but just so he understands - he is known to most (if not all) of us simply as "the guy who hates Peter Nash". That is a positive thing, but most of us who dislike Nash (myself included) aren't known here on a vintage baseball card discussion forum, simply for our hatred of someone. The only person who came close was Travis and his hatred of PSA and JSA, but at least we also knew him as the boxing autograph guy.

But it is Robert's right to inadvertently (or purposely?) label himself here based completely on his relationship to Nash. It is only tiresome to me because I have read most of his 15 posts, and I'm not seeing anything new. But again, that's his right.

Having said all that - sorry, Robert, if I vented unfairly. Please continue, and I sincerely hope you get justice. And if there is something related to the forum that you can contribute, I would love to read it - you sound like a guy who could turn some of that passion toward positive stuff that would be interesting.

Travis posted 10 posts per day all pertaining to his hatred of PSA/JSA, and would NEVER satisfactorily answer a direct question...I don't think we need to run off a guy who has 15 total posts.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Travis posted 10 posts per day all pertaining to his hatred of PSA/JSA, and would NEVER satisfactorily answer a direct question...I don't think we need to run off a guy who has 15 total posts.

Do you really think that by suggesting he post about something other than Peter Nash, I'm trying to run him off?

And if that was my intent, do you think there's any chance at all that it would succeed?

(Both rhetorical questions, wrist-slap noted)

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Do you really think that by suggesting he post about something other than Peter Nash, I'm trying to run him off?

And if that was my intent, do you think there's any chance at all that it would succeed?

(Both rhetorical questions, wrist-slap noted)

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

Edited - TOTAL POST RE-WRITE

Okay, I get it. Just to be clear - I have read ALL of Robert's posts about Peter Nash. They indicated that Robert knows a lot about vintage baseball and has a lot of passion. I completely get the Nash thing - he screwed Robert, Robert hasn't gotten justice and some people are defending Nash as being some sort of hobby watchdog who writes great stories, which is of course bullshit. Robert's comments about the Delehanty bat made it clear that he knows stuff the rest of us don't know, and that we'd probably like to hear more about.

It would be more interesting to me personally, to hear the non-Nash stuff, but I understand that the train-wreckage is still on the track.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I didn't say not to post about Peter Nash - I suggested that he post about other things as well. You seem to be encouraging him to only post about Nash, and I think he's got more to add to this forum than to simply use it as a space to vent against Nash - that habit of his makes it look like Nash 'owns' him, and if he posted about other things I wouldn't have made the comment.

It would be great if all of our thousands of members with less than 15 posts would contribute more, but I just felt like your post was unnecessarily hostile, and I'd rather not chase off someone who has a lot to tell us about a situation that I'd like to learn more about.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

No, but I did think your first post claiming that Peter Nash "Owns" him was out of line. Not trying to slap your wrist or do any moderating at all, I find all of this fascinating and I don't want Robert to feel like he can't post about what has happened to him.

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

It would be great if all of our thousands of members with less than 15 posts would contribute more, but I just felt like your post was unnecessarily hostile, and I'd rather not chase off someone who has a lot to tell us about a situation that I'd like to learn more about.

"out of line", "unnecessarily hostile" - why Dan, those are the nicest things you've said to me in years. I'm moving away from the train-wreck before I get my wrists "not slapped" for a third time.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Runscott

"out of line", "unnecessarily hostile" - why Dan, those are the nicest things you've said to me in years. I'm moving away from the train-wreck before I get my wrists "not slapped" for a third time.

Eh, okay. But don't try to pass off your first post as really wanting to crack Robert's knowledge of the hobby. You weren't fooling anyone.