I guess nothing gets by that "autograph eye" of yours. LOL!

You may have spoken to Richard, but you were not the first to tell me. (I guess I just didn't piss you off soon enough.)

Don't worry, though, Chris. I consider both yours and Richard's behavior here equally hypocritical, duplicitous, and inexcusable.

To the people that I have a lot of respect for stop acting like third graders.:mad:
To the rest.
I was thinking of something to say but its not worth it. You will never change:(

By the way, David, you have no one to blame but yourself about your first "1927 Yankees" baseball.

You're the self-proclaimed vintage Yankees autograph expert.

You're the one that attempted to start-up a Quick Opinion service on Net54.

You held that "1927 Yankees" ball for over decade and during that time you never knew about the person who penned that baseball? Why?

Self-proclaimed experts like yourself are suppose to be keeping up with the Joneses.

Chris is 100% correct.

Thank you for the compliment, David.

That's true. And I never said otherwise. I bought the ball because I was fooled by it. My mistake, and mine alone.

Not sharing with me the fact that you thought the ball a forgery as soon as you had suspicions is, though, as I stated before, hypocritical, and inexcusable.

But, you just go on publicly congratulating yourself for whatever you do.

We're all used to it.

David, you're unbelievable.

If you remember correctly, it was August 2011 when I first saw full images of your "1927 Yankees" ball. I requested photos from you after your avatar made me suspicious of the autographs.

Before that, I had never seen your first "1927 Yankees" ball.

When I first wanted to tell you the autographs were forgeries, I didn't have the heart to do it. I have written that more than a few times here on Net54.

It was approximately two weeks later that I finally informed you all of the autographs were forgeries.

And you didn't believe me, did you, David?

No you didn't.

You went to your friend Jodi, didn't you, David? Then you told the Net54 members here that your friend relayed that the autographs were forgeries.

You give the impression that I knew for months or years that your "1927 Yankees" ball were all forgeries and that I held that information from you. That's a 100% lie.

That isn't the case. You know it and I know it.

That's what you do, David. You spin and deflect. Then you'll start calling me names. Why? Because that's what you do.

I've posted what happened above. As usual, you present a totally self-serving, BS version.

What part of "In a fit of pique, Richard told me the ball was a 'Johnny F' original" don't you understand?

Richard told me, Chris. Richard. (Only to get back at me, but, what the hell. It was still Richard.)

I know you're his little lap-dog, Chris. But you still are two different people.

You can't even keep your story straight from one post to the next within the same thread!

"Oh what tangled webs we weave... "

Seriously kids.....who gives a sh**?

Here is the "nice ball" email you refer to Chris:

REDACTED BY LEON

It is dated 22 August 2011.

Richard informed me the ball was fake on 31 October 2011, and you then chimed in.

Two months later.

By your own admission above, when you sent the "nice ball" email, you knew the ball was a forgery. You said nothing until two months later--and then only when Richard publicly referred to "another board member" who agreed with him. You then identified yourself as that member.

Yet you just explicitly stated above that the idea that you withheld that information from me "for months" is a "100% lie."

Check your pants, Chris They're on fire.

Agreed. Guys who have so much to give to help with the fight against forgeries, and they engage in this needless crap. sad.

Those statements are accurate.

What's the tangled web?

You know as well as I do, that after I got your full images of the ball, and I found my suspicions to be correct, I didn't have the heart to tell you they were bad. And I emailed you "Nice ball."

That is absolutely correct. At the time I didn't want to break your heart about the ball. It was two weeks after that I sent you a Net54 email that read "Do you know who Johnny Fang is?"

You have Dan and everyone else here thinking that I was holding back that information for years.

Tell me, David, how does a Tom Tresh collector know that your ball was bad, but a self-proclaimed vintage Yankees autograph expert not know?

David, write what you want and believe what you want.

I guess they do. :D

Chriis, when you told what you thought. Did he think you where correct?

You're right, David. I got my timeframe wrong.

And Richard has already confirmed that I sent him the photos of your "1927 Yankees" ball after my initial suspicions.

And you're point, David?

Are you blaming us because you owned a $10,000 forgery for over a decade?

Or are you using me getting my timeframe wrong as a way to deflect and spin?

Yep, I got the timeframe wrong. And yep, I didn't have the heart to tell you that you owned a set of forgeries.

You got me, David.

Sorry to disappoint you, David. I guess I'm not as perfect as you thought I was. My apologies for breaking your heart.

I appreciate your admitting your mistake, Chris.

And, as I have said before, while I was initially heartbroken, the end result was the removal of a serious forgery from my collection. For that I'm grateful--grateful that I pissed Richard off.

No he didn't, Shelly. He went to his friend Jodi, who confirmed that his "1927 Yankees" autographs were not authentic.

Why would David believe me? I'm just a lowly Tom Tresh collector who hasn't (according to David) spent more than a ten-spot on memorabilia.

After all, Shelly, David is the self-proclaimed vintage Yankees autograph expert.

Why isn't this self-proclaimed vintage Yankees autograph expert keeping up with the Joneses

Why doesn't this expert know of the various forgers that have been around? Isn't that part of being an expert; keeping up with the Joneses?

Tomorrow is a new day.

If you saw this ball and Richard saw the ball and Jodi was on the net at that time. Why did he not say anything. He was the one that was trusted.:confused:When was the ball purchased and why did he not show it to Jodi in the first place. Why are you being blamed for his mistake. If I am correct without your help he would have never had any idea it was bad no matter what the timeing was.
If you had a really good friend that you thought was an expert on autographs. Why would you not ask him before you bought an item that cost in the high teens. I am now really confused.

You're confused? Why are you getting involved? You clearly have no idea what went on, when the ball was purchased, from whom the ball was purchased, etc. You--as usual--are totally ignorant. Yet you feel you have to comment, 'cause it involves your two buddies.

Jodi was the one that was trusted? You bet. For many, many, reasons.

Not the least of which is that he's not a self-serving blowhard, like your bandmates. (Are you three joined at the hip?)

PLEASE TAKE IT PRIVATE . This is getting just plain sickening, and I don't understand why its allowed. Yeah, I only read it, because I hope someone is gonna say enough , or Leon Kills it.

You really think closeing this down would change anything?

Because I back up my words unlike some people here, this is for Richard.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thread
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=139649

Post
http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...48&postcount=9

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thread
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...12#post1002912

Posts
http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...2&postcount=31

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...8&postcount=43

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...3&postcount=47

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...8&postcount=50

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...3&postcount=52

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...1&postcount=74

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...6&postcount=77

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...3&postcount=84

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Criticism of Huggins and Scott

Thread
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...711#post967711


Posts
http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...1&postcount=10

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...8&postcount=59

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=101

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=106

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=161

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...&postcount=168


I could list many more, but I've proven my point that I'm not in anyone's pocket. I stand behind what I post, I admit when I'm wrong and I certainly don't start threads that have ulterior motives.

I is nice to see someone keep his word I would think that by morning you will have your name in lights.
The only downer is that the Buckeys will have you for brunch in the next couple months/:p

Hey, we're 1 and 1 against your Buckeyes since joining the B1G Ten, but yeah, you're probably right. :D

Dan - I stated in one of my posts that I thought some of your questions to me were thoughtless.
I don't think I ever stated you were in anyone's pocket.
Thank you for posting links to your posts which do show where you stand.
You even apparently defended me in that thread about Heritage banning me. Thank you for that.
I still feel that you stating that "we" allowed the Michigan forger to continue to operate was very inappropriate, considering that we were not sitting idly by and doing nothing. It is not like we can arrest the guy. What we can do is very limited and sometimes it makes a difference, sometimes it does not.
I am willing to bury the hatchet with you if that is agreeable to you.

Done! I don't doubt the sincerity you guys have in getting the bad guys...we definitely disagree on how it should be handled. I do think that the more knowledge that everyone has the better the autograph hobby will be.

It's said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. I think all some of us are trying to say is let's try something a little different. I think Richard and Chris and Shelly know by now the people on this board that are actually in it for the hobby or their own collections and that they can be trusted with some knowledge to help, if not stop, then at least contain some of the forgeries out there. I know everyone in the hobby has gained knowledge from the people that came before them and I hope that kind of comradery will continue on.

Chris I have a question. I completely understand not having the heart to inform someone that one of their prized possessions is in fact a forgery. But rather than say nothing you message him with a comment that would ony serve to reinforce his false sense of security that the ball was the real deal. What was your motivation to message David with such a comment?

Here's a good example of the double standard around here.

I've waited 24 hours for a so-called moderator on this site for citing Atkatz for posting a personal email in public on this forum.

Not one of you so-called mods cited the above infraction.

Atkatz calling me an a...hole is allowed and now this.

Don't get so bent out of shape, Chris.

Leon's already stated that he's in your corner. (He's certainly not in mine.)

I'm not bent out of shape, David.

Just curious about the double-standard by the mod stationed here.

I don't follow every thread all of the time or catch every board infraction. Personal emails are not allowed to be posted. They have been edited out. Please don't post emails again, per the rules.

As for being in Chris's corner, I am in. I am for anyone that will help get rid of fraud in the hobby. I do think more transparency is almost always good...and understand fully about not revealing some minute details.

Thanks so much, Leon. That email happened to catch Chris in a bold-faced lie. But I guess that's not so important.

Kudos to you Leon for this post.

Don't you ever get tired of making a show of kissing Leon's ass?