they hate the fact that it's true. its always the tactic that gets used, misdirect, change the subject and deflect. that's why the tpa's bonehead authentications and the stolen material can change hands all this time. If there were dozens and dozens of vigilant people instead of just a few, it would be all fixed by now.

Instead some want what is going on right now to continue.

100 worst authentications from the abc, xyz's coming up soon. get a front row seat.

I'm on pins and needles waiting...

100 out of how many hundreds of thousands???? You ck eBay, auctions, the web in search of items to post.. What else do you do with yourself?

Ben,
It is not just the multiple mistakes that bother people. We all make mistakes.
In the opinion of some it is a far worse problem than multiple mistakes.

when you issue an loa for an item and the loa says it was checked against exemplars, and then only after being caught, you pull the loa from the auction house due of a lack of exemplars, then is it a mistake?

how can i or anyone else make that "mistake"? it is the gravity of the 'mistakes' that is very concerning not the fact that one occasionally occurs. It's too many 'mistakes' and too many big mistakes that could have easily been caught to chalk up to JUST human error and not other factors like too few authenticators, authenticators authenticating out of their specialty. going too fast, too few/no exemplars.

A mistake occurs when you have all your ducks in a row, put forward your very best effort using all available resources at your disposal, and a mistake still occurs. Is this the case? you be the judge.

Once upon a time a guy posted a baloney jim corbett signature here and i said to myself, "it's obviously bad to someone with a lot of experience in boxing signatures, but i bet it gets either an abc or xyz cert."

sure enough in a few weeks, he posts it again with an xyz cert, and xyz company lists no boxing experts on their site. I knew it would happen and it did. How is that a classic definition of a mistake?

properly authenticating an autograph like that requires experience and preparation, neither of which was evidently executed in this case. If i dont know dentistry and someone comes to me with an abcess tooth and i pull the wrong tooth, did i just make a 'mistake'? well yes and no, but it's not a mistake that should have happened because I am not a dentist.

Some of these companies are authenticating autographs they have no business authenticating, and without the proper exemplars, staff and manpower, they set themselves up for their own failure. I didn't tell them to do it that way and the collecting public needs to know what is REALLY happening. You don't want people to know? you think they are doing great? please explain why you think that?

It's just the 100 WORST authentications by these companies, not all of them. It had to be pared down greatly to make 100, there were easily scores more that didn't make the final cut.

Geez, Travis, looks to me like a "misdirection ploy" by Nash to deflect his own issues in the hobby......

Oh that's right, Travis, it's only "misdirection" if someone posts a thread about Nash.............

This thread is about Peter Nash...stop deflecting and misdirecting.

Sounds like you are announcing a hockey game :).

You, too, Scott........

I guess what Travis is saying is that we should only write about what Travis wants to write about.

Travis, is it okay for you to write about the TPA's, but we shouldn't be writing about Peter Nash?

no go right ahead, write about nash, but i dont see any williams writing about nash, because its all a fake. you arent going to write about nash. you dont care about nash, this thread wasnt started for people to write about nash, because if you look at it, other than the originals papers posted that have been posted many times before, its not about nash, it's about how what he says on hos should be disregarded, but its not about him. it was posted in response to me mentioning heritage, but it's not about nash at all.

just like when i post about psa or jsa, then out comes todd mueller. its not about mueller. it's never been about mueller. if it was, you would post about mueller all the time, even when i dont even visit net54 and dont post about psa or jsa.

but you only bring out mueller when i mention psa or jsa, just like leon only brings the nash thread out when i mention heritage, their sponsor.

it's all fake misdirection people, and always has been.

if you want to post about him, why dont you post about him then? you just made a post with a question aimed at me, why wasnt your post about nash? because you dont care about nash.

here's an assignment for chris williams,

1. write about nash, and write about him each day for two weeks. tell us how much you know about him and write about him, no matter what anyone else writes about. just like i write about psa and jsa no matter what anyone else writes about, I could care less what anyone else writes about. show us you are interested in writing about nash.

just as i thought.

All in good time, Travis. All in good time.

Basically, Travis, what you are writing, is that you don't like anyone (me included, of course) mentioning Mueller or Nash.

Just remember our "Gentleman's Bet," Travis.

Then stop rambling about "misdirection" or whatever you term it. You evidently care or else you'd stop.

Mike

Again, a guy like me has no idea who any of these people are or what they are about.

However, it seems like Travis knows or his friends (?) with Mr. Nash, so I'll ask him. Is this Nash guy really a criminal? Has he done bad things in the hobby?

Thanks in advance for taking the time.

Totally untrue and you know it. I specifically asked you TWICE about Nash and what you thought about his $700,000+++ fraud. You ignored me both times.

You wrote this: "some of these places, (not psa or jsa ofr course) want money over everything and admitting mistakes and correcting them for the good of the hobby doesnt fit their profit sharing plan so to speak. in other words they dont care." And I asked you about it. Has Nash corrected his mistakes, or doesn't he care. You ignored me this time, too.

I asked Shelly if NASH should get a free pass. I didn't direct that one to you, so you ignored it.

Every misdirection in this thread has been from you, Travis, and everybody sees it.

I'm asking you direct questions about NASH, Travis. Man up and answer them.
Ken

He won't answer your question (see the post above this one-he hasn't answered any direct questions in this thread).

OK. Thanks.

Sometimes when people don't answer, it's all the response you need.

Without getting into the moralistic aspects of Mr. Nash's character, from what I have seen, Mr. Nash's disputes with others, via the court system, are strictly civil in nature. I have not seen where Mr. Nash has been charged and/or convicted of anything of a criminal nature.

If others have anything to dispute this, please post this information.

I do have one question for Leon. Has Nash ever paid Rob any money or does he still owe him 700 thousand.
Ken, this is not defending what he did. If he is paying the man back would you then think differently about him?

A little history on the Peter vs Rob feud.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...ticle-1.431288

It would, esp. if he admitted his wrongdoings. Also, I'd want to hear his side on the whole Cooperstown Forger fiasco. From what I've read, the evidence (or what seems like evidence) against Nash there is more damning than most of the evidence Nash posts against others.

Ken

Thank you for bringing this back up. I have asked several times about who authored the White Betsy blog and what happened to it, but either no one knows or they don't want to say.

It is my understanding that some items were sold and were used to pay back part of the debt. I believe Lifson is still owed over 100k. It is also my understanding he still owes the Fraziers close to 475k after interest.

To answer the question concerning is what Nash has done criminal or civil, I don't know, I am not a lawyer. I do know that a good friend of mine is in possession of over 100k of fraudulent 19th century memorabilia that came from Nash. To me that is criminal. Until he is made whole I won't have a warm fuzzy about Pete Nash. Also, all of the lies and twists and turns.....just not good. And I have quite a few other documents I can and will post at some point. All of them are Nash's entanglements with the legal system...They seem to show him lying, cheating and generally being a bad person. And it's a shame too because I have heard he has a brilliant mind.

Leon, if he commited grand theft then it should be criminal. I just dont understand how everthing the guy did is a civil case. If you commit a felony you get arrested.:confused:

Ken, again it comes back to not what he did but is what he is writeing fact or fiction. Untill now I see no one disagreeing with his findings. That is what is so crazy about this. Like everything else time will tell.
It was just about a year ago that Bill Mastro told the world the Wagner was trimmed.Not that half the world all ready knew it. Strang things do happen.

I didn't say he committed grand theft. I don't even know the specifics of what it takes for that to be the case. Maybe he has the coaches corner syndrome. Does everything to the brink but not over it, concerning getting pinned. I don't know, that is just a guess. I don't think I have seen a criminal case against him either.

I guess what makes me angry about this thread is that all of the Peter Nash supporters won't even address his past issues with fraudulent behavior, we're supposed to ignore that and listen to what he is saying today. Or they try to downplay it calling it all a "Civil" matter. I think it's a bunch of crap. This guy ripped people off for a lot of money, he stole items that he was loaned and apparently has some connection to the mysterious "Cooperstown forger". I think some of you guys would take child care lessons from Casey Anthony. :mad:

+1

I never trust people's assertions, I always judge of them by their actions.
- Ann Radcliffe (1764 - 1823), The Mysteries of Udolpho, 1764

Something else I don't understand are the blanket assessments that EVERYTHING Nash is saying now is truth, or EVERYTHING he says should be thrown out. Like it somehow has to be ALL one or the other. Personally, just from what I've read of his writing, I don't think the man is capable of speaking straight black-and-white truth. Everything he writes is mixed with personal vendetta and hidden agendas, so that it all comes out muddied and gray and leaves you guessing where the lines between truth and fiction are crossed.

There is an old saying: "The best lies carry an element of truth," and I think the converse also holds true. Something like, "The purest truth is tainted by a little lie," which is akin to Jim's oft-quoted analogy involving a drop of urine in a glass of water. I'm sure the debate regarding Nash will continue for as long as he mixes at least some truth into what he writes, but I would caution anyone to carefully examine whatever he serves up rather than pinching your nose and swallowing it all down. Maybe he's turned over a new leaf, maybe not, but I would suggest using caution with anyone who has been caught pissing in the water cooler...

Dan who on here has said that he did nothing wrong. I have read a lot of remarks and outside of Travis everyone agrees that he did bad things. The only I I said if he did all these things why where they not felony"s. Every thing being said about him is over civil cases.
I dont beleive everyting I read and I sure as hell dont believe everything that is said

I do believe you are trying to downplay his past by bringing up civil vs criminal issues...why even bring it up? HE RIPPED PEOPLE OFF! And there are others here besides Travis who sit by silently even when questioned directly about Nash's past who just ignore the questions.

I have never down played his past. There is a HUGE difference between being a felon and someone being sued. If that is what you call defending him then I guess I am. You can not say he commited a crime when he has never been convicted of one. It is only your opinion that it should be a crime.
I will make this clear. I think what he has done in the past is terrible. If that means what he is doing now is wrong I would have to disagree.
Like I said about what he writes I believe half of what I read but it does make you think.

This civil/criminal dichotomy that some posters here are citing as having some exculpatory value is nonsense. Acts that are civil wrongs are also criminal acts and vice versa. Whether or not an act is prosecuted as a crime says nothing about whether the act satisfies the elements of a crime. It has more to do with whether there is a complaint made to the authorities by a victim, to which authority the complaint is made, how easy it is to prove the case, whether the case has sufficient public considerations and interests to justify the expense of prosecution, whether the case is part of a civil action already [I have heard prosecutors say that they do not like to be used as a collections agency by a civil litigant], and a bunch of other considerations I am certainly missing. I will give you two concrete examples:

1. I had a case with a client accused of defrauding a securities investor. I defended the civil case the investor filed against him. The alleged victim/plaintiff then decided to take the matter to the D.A. in Ventura. The D.A. decided to allocate the resources to investigate the case and then decided to prosecute it once the investigation was done. My client pleaded guilty to a lesser offense in return for a light, no-prison sentence, and then lost the civil trial.

2. Another client of mine was swindled out of a lot of money in a stock investment that was sold to him in violation of the state's securities laws. I turned the matter into the Los Angeles District Attorney's office and to the state Attorney General's securities division for investigation but they declined to prosecute. My client eventually received compensation via a civil action.

In each case the act did not change; the difference was how it was perceived and handled by the prosecuting authority.

Interesting...I guess stealing from the Hall of Fame and NYPL are not crimes either because I'm pretty sure that some of the people Peter Nash accuses of those crimes incidents were never convicted.

Excellent point. If all we are interested in reading/talking about is criminal activity as defined by conviction in a court of law, then everything on Nash's blog is moot.

Are we talking about cleaning up a hobby that we love? If so, any and all wrongdoing is game for discussion.

I for one don't pay money to TPAs, and I won't pay money if Nash starts selling a book. From what I've seen, neither is good for the hobby.

Lifson was caught red handed so what are you talking about?

Do you read posts, Travis? Did Lifson do anything listed in the post you quoted?

And why do you give a crap about Lifson, anyway? He isn't a TPA (who, unlike Lifson and Nash, are not currently the target of serious criminal or civil litigation).

someone said people werent convicted and i corrected him and pointed out lifson was caught red handed stealing baseball material out of the library.

quit changing the subject.

i am with shelly, if someone's got something on someone, let's hear it. the so-called saber rattling is getting old.

HOS posts evidence, eyewitness accounts, what's the holdup?

Travis, post #216 has some questions for you about the subject at hand. You are online right now, as I type this. Any chance you can respond??

Ken

PS: Also, I'm sure you are old enough to know the difference between "caught red handed" and "convicted," right?

Wait, has Lifson been convicted of stealing from a library? I haven't read about that, but I may have missed it in the nastiness that can be this hobby.

Good question: What IS the holdup, Travis? Could it be that these "eyewitness accounts" won't hold up in a court of law? Could it be that these libraries don't care about what has been stolen? Could it be that you are buying into Nash's agenda more than most people?

Seems to me to be a mix of the three. OR MAYBE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS ARE BACKING THE TPAS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TOO MUCH MONEY INVESTED IN THE STATUS QUO!!!

I dunno, that's my attempt to peek into your mindset.

If Nash's accusations are legit, I hope they are investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Same with Nash's fraud, that seems to have been proven in civil court.

edited to add: finally on page four. Scrolling was getting rough on this bad boy.

This is freaking hilarious....you totally ignored the legal papers posted by Leon in the first post of this thread. LOL!

Yes, Travis has yet again implored someone (me) to "quit changing the subject." Yet, as has been pointed out by many, he is the one most consistently changing the subject away from the point of this thread, which is the wrongdoings of Nash within this hobby.

I do not expect him to respond to this or your post.

Hence the man is an Ignoramus, IMHO

The only deflection is the deflection from the Puck you must have taken upside your noggin as a small child....so hard that head it's amazing that you can go through life this way... complete irritating, inflaming jerkoff on every level, every day, all the time, in every situation, at every turn... ALWAYS and Forever, IMHO

chuck tapia quit the hobby. but i would like to ask him a question.

what on HOS is not true? so you dont like the messenger, we get it. But the message is true and thats why people dont like it.

I don't call anyone names like that and it is only indicative of the fact he is losing the argument, that's when they resort to that type of language.

Your anonymous pals over at autographblahblahblah.com must really be losing the argument then.

Nash's six degrees to Rob Lifson game. Most of what Nash writes about him are insinuations and nothing else. He wasn't Halper's confederate; he wrote catalog descriptions based on available information, pre-MEARS. Did people lose money buying Halper's fakes? Yes. Would Rob Lifson have been involved if he knew they were fakes? No way.

He most certainly has not ever created a trophy ball, or a whole case full of them, unlike someone else everyone would like to see Nash write about.

BTW Travis, I think a lot of what you write is helpful. But people are judged by the company they keep.

David Davis

"Hang out with trolls long enough, and you become one yourself. ". Jim Starlin

Well said...and you will never see Travis address the fake trophy ball, the stolen items, the Cooperstown forger, et cetera. I assume that Travis has an agenda as well and I'm not so sure I trust his word on autographs anymore.