I keep noticing it A LOT. How many of you guys are lawyers?

Having read through this thread with interest, I've decided it's time for me to invite some abuse onto myself by offering my opinions (because I'm sure many will disagree... and I do understand the other side to this.)

First, the list of names doesn't give the nature of the shilling, and that is absolutely critical to determine what actually happened. There are degrees of seriousness here that are quite dramatic, depending on the type of shill bidding that occurred.

Consider these scenarios:
1. A collector is considering consigning some items to an AH, but is of course concerned that the items might end up selling at an unacceptably low price. So, the seller tells the AH that he'd be interested in offering his items, but he'd need to get certain minimum amounts, after shipping fees, consignment fees, authentication fees, and so on. The AH tells him they understand and will make sure he gets acceptable amounts for his stuff, or it'll be returned to him unsold. The consignor agrees, not knowing, caring, or having it even occur to him to ask, what mechanism the AH will use to establish those minimum price levels.

That mechanism could be a reserve, a hidden reserve, an in-house base initial (shill) bid, a bid from an active collector who would in fact like to purchase the item if he could get a great deal on it, and is perhaps considering placing larger bids later on to try to acquire the item, and so on. Bottom line: the consignor may not know which of the above methods will be used to protect his items. He may assume a generally accepted method will be employed - like a hidden reserve, but it might turn out the AH uses a method involving a shill bidder, without the consignor being aware of it.

In this scenario you might see a seller listing multiple items that all employed the same shill bidder... but the consignor was unaware anything wrong was taking place.

2. I'm sure most will disagree with me, but when I am bidding on an item incrementally, it doesn't really matter to me whether I'm going up against a real bidder, a shill bidder, or trying to reach a hidden reserve. I know what an item is worth to me, and I bid accordingly. We aren't talking about putting food on our families' tables here, we're talking about bits of cardboard, pieces of wood (bats) and pieces of old cloth (jerseys.) Sometimes these items also have ink (autographs) on them. If I don't win an item I'd like to add to my collection, I deal with it and it isn't that hard to do. If I pay more than I should, that's on me and I'll remind myself to be more disciplined next time.

I understand that when shill bidders end up being the high bidder and give the impression an item actually sold at an inflated price, it sends a false value to the marketplace. But that also happens when two legit bidders go toe-to-toe bidding on something they both need for their specific collections.

For instance, I recently paid over $2,200 for a 1964 Jim Kaat 1964 flannel. A few years ago, I know someone who paid over $4,000 for a 1962 Twins common shirt. He was very unlucky in that he ran up against someone else who really wanted it badly (I seriously doubt that was a shill situation... no shill bidder in their right mind would've dreamed they could've pushed the price to that level.)

So... did the $4,000 sale tell the market that a Twins common shirt is worth that much? No, I don't think so but in any case that specific price anomaly happened in the marketplace, and that general scenario takes place regularly, naturally, without shill bidders involved.

3. The third type of shill bidding is way, way different. That's when an AH exploits bidders' maximum bids. I do not know if any of the instances on that spreadsheet are of this variety, but to me, IF an AH accessed max bids and then used that info against the bidder, to pump up their bids, that would be, or should be, outright criminal.

Most AH have rules stating that bids are considered legal contracts, and placing a bid thus obligates the bidder to pay for items won. So, suppose an AH sees that a bid is standing at $1,000 but the high bidder has a max bid of $2,500. They could, in theory, use shill bidders to push that up artificially to the max bid, and then require the bidder to pay the inflated price. To me, that's basically theft.

I do not know if any of the instances on that list are of this type. I'm just saying... IF any of them were, then that would be very, very serious.

So, in sum:
1. If a consignor doesn't know shill bidders are being used to protect his listings, I see no guilt on his part, and minimal guilt on the part of the AH. Using reserves would be a better, more transparent, method.

2. If shill bidders are being used during incremental bidding, I understand it's wrong, but if I'm the victim, I'm not too bothered by it. Would I like to get the item cheaper? Of course. But ultimately I need to be disciplined and only pay as much as I want to pay for something. And when the plan backfires on the shill bidder, and they end up eating the consignment fees, buyers premiums, and so on, well, that's justice.

3. If an AH uses maximum bids submitted by bidders to drive up the actual bid, this is, or should be, outright criminal and people should go to jail or be fined. The fallout, as this scandal unfolds, could be that bidders may be reluctant to place max bids if they don't have complete confidence in the AH, and this could really drive down realized prices, especially for those auctions that extend well into the early morning hours.

So, my personal opinion is basically that a list of names without knowing who actually did what, is not sufficient to assume everyone on the list is "guilty," and it certainly is not enough to determine who (if anyone) might be "really, really guilty."

Mark17,

Have you ever been a shill bidder or had an auction house or other person place bids on your consignments?

-Ryan

I wondered if it would be possible to express an opinion here without being personally attacked........... guess not.

The answers are "no." I don't beat my wife either (only because I'm not married.)

Wife
 

Well, would you..if you had one ?

What is the purpose of arguing degrees of breaking the law? Does it really matter if you kill a person with one bullet to the head or if you slice them open and let them bleed to death and then cut them into little pieces ? Murder is murder !

I agree. I don't see the point in discussing different scenarios of illegality.

Yes, murder is murder, but jaywalking is not murder.

correct...jaywalking is jaywalking...and murder is murder...just as fraud is fraud...and shilling is shilling. lets not cross streams here.

You have to expect it. The tough part is not lashing out when it happens.

Yeah, but...What if I hit somebody with my car while they're jaywalking??? Is that murder??? What if the person happened to be my ex-wife??? (I mean, if I HAD an ex-wife???) Help a brotha out here...

Mark

In all seriousness you kind of sound like an employee of an AH trying to justify shill bidding.

Its a shame IMO that the staggering buyers/sellers premiums aren't enough for the scoundrels at XYZ auction house that nets them upwards of 35% off the top of whatever value your item currently holds when most of them can't even be bothered to provide pictures of items proving authenticity but some feel IMO its their god given rite to charge an additional 20-25% through shill bidding practices to additionally line their pockets and look like heroes to their consigners in the attempt to bring back future consignments.

Unfortunately for anyone such as myself whose bid and won at an auction house common sense dictates IMO that shill bidding has been a standard business practice for the past 20+ years.

Most people involved in this practice of shilling who derive their living from these sales obviously don't see anything wrong with the practice since it appears and feels like its industry wide.

Does anyone really think that these AH's don't know who individuals are that are bidding in their auctions especially the higher rollers and what your spending and collecting habits are and what you might be willing to pay?

Does anyone in their rite mind really trust these AH's self policing themselves in regards to ethic violations with the easy money thats at stake?

Can anyone even imagine the shredding and deleting of incriminating documents that has and will continue to go on until big brother steps in?

Its also quite apparent that white collar crime pays these days as the punishment that is handed out is hardly a deterrent or fits the crime of bilking the public out of hundreds of thousands of dollars for years upon years.

I don't believe at this point give the sorry state of affairs of the hobby that any benefit of the doubt can be given to AH's without proof of their stated business practices and/or innocence in regards to these matters, without these auctions being run by some type of independent government appointed body to oversee these practices.

The cats been out of the bag for a longtime now in regards to these practices and it takes sensational stories to motivate people to speak out.

Its also quite apparent IMO that someone or something has motivated Game Used Collector to make the thread about this very subject unavailable on their site for the past 2-days.

IMO Its also quite disturbing the gestapo type tactics that have been and are being employed over at Ken Goldin's GUU to silence the community since IMO it is Ken who likes to portray himself in his marketing schemes as some type of friend and good guy to collectors.

IMO GUU is nothing more than a marketing arm of Goldin Auctions since its take over. It also appears IMO that only items that don't appear in Goldin Auctions can be publicly questioned now for fear of being banned or being publicly scolded for doing so.

Its a shame that the powers that be in this hobby feel the need to silence and or discredit anyone or thing that comes out and questions any of the misdoings and going on's that occur so frequently now that most hobbyists just want to turn a blind eye until they are confronted face to face with the truth.

IMO why doesn't Ken get off his high horse and explain himself in regards to this matter? instead of choosing to hide behind this posted reply on his behalf on GUU:

"I am aware, as is Ken, that his name appears as a consignor on the list made public by Doug Allen as part of his attempt to reduce his jail sentence. Ken will not be discussing this matter on any public forum, a matter that is over eight years old and references when he was a private collector five years before Goldin Auctions was formed. However, if it is important for you to hear from him, he will discuss this matter personally with you and has done so with a number of members already. His email address is Ken@GoldinAuctions.com.

I also want to ensure our friends, consignors, bidders and business partners that this list has nothing to do with the current business of Goldin Auctions. When founded in the summer of 2012, Goldin Auctions was built with the interests of bidders and consignors in mind. From its beginning, it was explained to me that Goldin Auctions has implemented extensive ethics, rules and compliance safeguards built in to protect bidders and consignors including:

1. Goldin Auction employees do not have access to maximum bids. Our auction software provider has turned off, at our request, our ability to see your proxy/ceiling bids. A maximum bid placed online will never be known or seen by us in order to hold our auction process to the highest industry standards. This is for both bidder and consignor protection.

2. Goldin does not have access to passwords. While that can often cause an inconvenience when someone forgets their password, it gives bidders the assurance that their account is safe.

3. Goldin has a reserve system. We state the rules on reserves, and they are posted online. This avoids issues of hidden reserves or using shill bidding to meet a hidden reserve.

4. We use the highest authenticity procedures in the business. We will not sell non-authenticated items; we do not issue our own LOAs; we rely on the most respected industry experts for all authentications. In addition, as many of you know, even with these procedures in place we will still routinely pull items during an auction if there is a third-party authenticator error. Further, as many of you have experienced, when concern over an item is brought to our attention we are extremely responsive to any questions.

5. We implement limited credits for any new bidders. We do not give new bidders unlimited bidding rights with us when they register. We restrict them with a strict bidding limit until they have been proven to be credit worthy and legitimate users. Even with other auction references, we still place limits on most bidders initially to protect all other auction bidders and consignors.

For a complete list of our compliance rules, you can click the link below:

https://www.goldinauctions.com/rules.aspx

When I joined Goldin Auctions in February 2013, I researched the way the company was established and made a post as to why I was joining Goldin Auctions. As you know from my creating Game Used Universe in 2005, the credibility of the industry is of utmost importance to me and I will only associate with an entity I believe is committed to consistently doing what is right. I do not feel anything has changed with regard to Goldin Auctions. If it did, I would not continue in my position with them".

Sincerely,
Chris
__________________
Christopher Cavalier
Vice President of Consignments - Goldin Auctions

These are my opinions and views from my experiences over the past 35+ years of being a hobbyist

Ron Kosiewicz

To me, We aren't discussing legality. We aren't discussing right or wrong. Shilling is wrong and (in some or most) cases illegal.

That being said I think the scenarios Mark17 laid out make sense to discuss. If you go 65mph in a 55mph zone you will generally get a ticket if stopped (*and you aren't a pretty girl, we aren't). But if you are going 137mph in a 55mph zone you will probably go to jail. Both are speeding, both are wrong....one is worse than the other. I look at each line item as it's own scenario but can also see patterns etc...just like everyone else. I hope we don't stifle a good discussion (understanding it might not be good to some)...

LMAO..quit that, now back to the story....

Ron,
I agree with much of what you say here. But, if you read my post again, you'll see that I'm not defending shill bidding. I'm saying:

1. I think it's quite possible a consignor might have shill bidding occur on his items without knowing it; the AH using that method rather than the preferred reserve method, to comply with a consignor's condition of his items hitting certain price. All the consignor knows is that his items either sell or don't - he doesn't know, or care, about the bidding history or computer code behind the scenes. Isn't it reasonable to see a scenario where this could happen?

2. I, personally, on items that I, personally am bidding on, do not care what is in the heart of the person I'm bidding against. I don't care if they want the item to resell, to add to their collection, to give to someone as a gift, or if it's someone trying to bump the price up. I'm NOT saying it's OK, I am saying that I, personally, bid what I want to bid, and if someone wants to play the shill game on me, they'd best realize they may very well get burned.

Others feel differently. I get that. If you or anyone wants to bid against me in an auction, feel free to do so regardless of your motive because I don't know what you're thinking and I don't care.

3. I'm saying that if an AH uses max bids to screw bidders, it's a crime that should be punishable by fine or jail. I don't know how I could've put that in stronger terms.

Now, as to your comment quoted above, I'm tired of defending myself against these personal attacks and accusations. No, I don't work for an auction house and never have. And I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party.

The Spirit of Law is much more important than the letter of the law .

I had to Google "GUU" to learn what it is. The super long defense of his employer by an employee seems to be that since Goldin started an auction house, they're now behaving themselves. As if we all just fell off the turnip truck.

Every argument on this thread where someone essentially said "it's the hobby, just lump it", I'd say get me back the $180 (at least) that I see Mastro stole from me, then we can talk.

Finally, the AdBlock extension for Chrome is a great way to block "sponsors".

Bill

I'm not sure why you took that question as a personal attack because I think it's a fair question to ask. I am not at all interested in hearing what shill bidders think about any of this. I think a lot of people who are not on the list have not chimed in at all due to the fact that they, too, have shilled items, either in Mastro during the years the records were destroyed, or with other auction houses. There are far more offenders than what appears on that list.

Keep in mind, that list is just 2 years from just one auction house. There are probably quite a few board members who have shill bidding skeletons in their closets and are hoping everyone would just drop this issue and move on to funner things.

I disagree with most of what you say in points 1 and 2 and I don't understand why so many people are coming to the defense of the people named on the list when they are perfectly capable of doing that themselves. If you think there are examples where something on the list might have looked like shill bidding, but was not, please let us know. Perhaps there are answers to those questions. If someone has been incorrectly added to that list, let us know. Or at least let us know why they can't come here and question it on their own.

But your point about there being different degrees is valid. Is Peter S. the same as Doug Allen? No way. Not even in the same ballpark. That's why he's not going to jail. But he's still a shill bidder. There are some examples of multiple offenders that were undeniably involved in shill bidding, though. Are you really suggesting that JC Clarke, or Kevin Keating, or Dave Forman shouldn't be on the list?

I would have thought that anyone who looked at the list or knew anything about Doug Allen would be able to easily put into perspective the differing levels of criminals that made the list.

Doug Allen > JC Clarke > Peter Spaeth



-Ryan

Maybe my posts have not been clear, or maybe you are ascribing some preconceptions on them/me, so I will respond to you once more to see if I can clarify:

A. I'm not a shill bidder. I've only sent about 8 items to auction houses in the past 20 years, so I'm not anything close to being a "frequent flyer." If possible, let's focus on the issue, and the points raised, rather than on me.

B. There are only about 5 names on the list that I even recognized, and nobody whom I have spoken to in the past 20-odd years. I did do business with one of those named back in the 1980s a few times. So I cannot comment on who is/isn't there.

C. I'm not defending anybody because I don't know the players or their crimes, or the validity of the list for that matter. For those same reasons I'm not comfortable condemning them either. Maybe more (substantiated) info will come out and that might change... we'll see how this plays out.

Others here are much quicker to judge and that's up to them. If you want to take issue with the fact I'm not grabbing my pitchfork and joining you, that's fine. If it turns out people were using bidders' maximum bids against them, I'll join you and bring a howitzer.

When you say: "But your point about there being different degrees is valid..." that's good because that was about 90% of what I was trying to get across.

That list was huge. Thought I would never stop scrolling down. Wow

col·lu·sion

/kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
Example:
"When I joined Goldin Auctions in February 2013, I researched the way the company was established and made a post as to why I was joining Goldin Auctions. As you know from my creating Game Used Universe in 2005, the credibility of the industry is of utmost importance to me and I will only associate with an entity I believe is committed to consistently doing what is right. I do not feel anything has changed with regard to Goldin Auctions. If it did, I would not continue in my position with them".

CON.CLU.SION

Can we finally put this thread to bed...or move it elsewhere...?
.
.

Taking full responsibility and owning it: A person doesn’t take 100% full responsibility, if they then follow up and put a spin on it to somewhat justify their actions. “I knew it was wrong, but at that time, it’s what everyone was doing.” You knew it was wrong and you did it anyway. The end!

i think it's interesting a bunch of y'all want this thread put to rest...or moved. SERIOUSLY? This is the biggest news(even though we knew it was happening prior to "the list") whether positive or negative to hit our beloved hobby pretty much ever.

Does this discussion make some of y'all uncomfortable? If so...WHY?

Ya...I'd much rather look at countless threads of fake wagners and 52 topps mantle cards.

SERIOUSLY?

bump

Hey, douche bag, put your name in your post!

And if any of the other members didn't read what he wrote earlier and then edited out, yes, he is a douche bag.

Edited to add: I've had a couple board members ask me what he said. Basically he said how this was only a 'rich white man's' crime. There was more, but that's the gist of it.

man looking at the last 30 or so posts..i have to think, man some posters think MY posts are confusing ...but yet they can understand all of those posts with the analogies ..I need a rosetta stone

Not sure if anyone posted this as I haven't payed too much attention to this thread but:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ya...ampaign=buffer

Well-posted Jake :)

I posted that a while back in this long and winding road thread

Yes, always the contrarian instigator. Nice....

This topic should be talked about as long as needed until there is full disclosure of who did what followed by verifiable results thru a 3rd party of change in business practices moving forward.

I would also have to question the motives of anyone that would want to see this topic silenced after the damage that a few at the top have done and continue to do to the entire hobby.

Why End???
 

Almost 90k hits and approaching 700 replies? This is an amazing thread with many avenues to explore that hasn't even been walked down yet.

silence is deafening
 

guu emergency staff meeting monday morning 2/1/2016. from left to right: CC, moderators, and KG the brain

What?

what are it about those thread it dont u git?

Not defending anyone but........Here is an avenue to explore......Care to explain why you are banned from Goldin Auctions for not paying a 3k'ish invoice from Oct 4, 2013? Might that be at least a partial motive as to why you are posting? I would imagine not paying for an invoice could almost be considered shill bidding.

Cat's fur to make kitten's britches

Ken is an outstanding member in the hobby.

I don't stoop to namecalling. You would not say this to my face, believe me.
You have shown yourself to be exactly who you are.

You can not post anymore in this thread without putting your full name next to your post. I am not taking sides only trying to maintain the rules.....


and to correct an above statement concerning an invoice day and date to Mike Wo.ng, it was actually a $3700 invoice from 11//2014....other than that, I am out of it...not my problem. :)

Thanks, I just spit my coffee on my desk laughing!

Your posts ARE confusing; don't sell yourself short.

Im a little confused
 

Question will be coming.

see my last post. In this case better to be a dead beat bidder with 2600 saved than a du ma out 2600 and stuck with a jersey with a question mark.

Guess
 

Let me guess the question...

In two separated postings Peter_Spaeth stated that he himself had placed a bid on Ron's item - but in a later post Peter_Spaeth states that he allowed Ron to use his personal account to place a "Reserve Bid".

The question: Peter, which is it? Did you place a "reserve bid" for Ron or did Ron use your account to place his own Reserve Bid?

Shawn England

Im a little confused here Peter and I wanted to maybe see if YOU could clarify this. I posted up your response from post 143 and your friend ron from post 403.
You say "Ron then asked "ME" if I would bid for him after thinking it over "I"agreed. Then a little further on you say "No one out bid me"

Then as Ron Goldberg says in his post " but the fact of the matter is that he didnot place these bids I did" "he didnot know what I was doing. He wasnot an active participant in the bidding"

So my question is this WHO BID?
It is clear that one of you is lying. Or as a lawyer might put it not telling the truth.
So again just to clear this up WHO BID? Very simple to answer.
If it was you than you shilled your friends auction, If it was Ron than he shilled his own auction. Just curious Peter to the response.

Fair question let me clarify. Ron placed the bids, as he stated. When I first posted -- as Ron also stated -- I did not want to try to distance myself from/blame Ron because he is a friend, so I did not emphasize that distinction. I believe this answers Al as well.

No you just stoop to making disparaging remarks about "white people".

I thought the question was going to be
 

edited to allow this overall serious discussion to stay on point

Pete - I understand your point of view. I guess I am just (or only) uncomfortable with this subject because I have not (to my knowledge) been a victim of such misdeeds. I'm a small time player in the hobby so perhaps that is my 'protection'.

The notices of fake cards are usually very helpful even though the two cards you mention will always be out of my reach (damn powerball quick pick).


Having a thread entitled '...list of criminals...' takes a lot of the 'gloss off the apple' for me, but I realize it's better to wash anything before you eat it.


Anyway...it's raining today and I'm just looking for sunny days with high skies and a gentle breeze coming in from left.

Ah yes, the eternal hopefulness of Spring...
.
.

Thats what I wanted to know.
So again to be clear YOU gave ron your account and password with your knowledge and he acted from his computer and placed the shill. Thats a yes or no answer councilor....

"The speed of light is faster that the speed of sound that is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak"

I've read every post in this thread, some twice. There's everything in here from a$$ raping to accusations of racism; but in between is a wealth of good knowledge and educated rants.

However, this signature line from Al, is funniest sh** I've seen in a while.

Shawn that is exactly what I want to know....

Answered
 

I think Peter_Spaeth answered the question... But part of the answer leads me to believe that Ron placed multiple bids using Peters account because Peter states: "Ron placed the bids"...

Peter,
My guess is that you wont answer the last part of my question on the grounds that it might incriminate you.. Or in other words plead the 5th...

No there was only one lot involved I am sure. 9 years later I really don't recall what the bidding was on the one lot it may well only have been one bid and I misspoke.

,

Does Al have a last name?

ah and your posts really add value and people thank you for their posts...I guess my last post wasn't confusing for you to comment..

I know I will be confused if you actually post something that people in the hobby would value when commenting to me.


and no. posts about .fake 1952 Topps Mantle and Wagners on ebay do not count if you go there...

Peter,
I have no obsession with you ,personally I could care less about you but there are 2 type of people I hate cheats,and liars. And you my friend have fit that mold. You refuse to answer a simple question and that leads me to believe that maybe you have more to hide. Wow kinda sucks to be on the other end of the questioning doesnt it. And Peter people see that you do the dance around the questions and I do believe that many think very differently of you now. For god sake Peter just answer the question I posed maybe it will do you some good to get it off your chest!!
Al S@meo.ne

first name was Big I thought...isn't that the first name of a lot of Als..

as to bastsballsbases:

Simple yes and no answers usually don't end up so simple...I think peter already fell on his sword.....badgering the witness I think is what lawyers say.....

First of all My name is at the bottom of some of my posts. I have been here on the board for a long time and most know me. Check for my name at the start of this on post 453 if you want. Its also right above you in post 701.

Second just want the truth nothing more or less. simple question deserves a simple answer.

Didn't he already answer the question? Ron placed the bid(s) using Peter's account. What else is there to answer?

..

No . The question he refuses to answer is DID YOU GIVE RON YOUR ACCOUNT # AND PASSWORD... That is all I want to know and if answered I will never ask Peter another question...

Oh and by the way as was asked of me please put your full name in your post as I dont see it there..
Al S@meo ne

Didn't this post in #668 answer the question? It is yes one way or the other, btw...

"Fair question let me clarify. Ron placed the bids, as he stated. When I first posted -- as Ron also stated -- I did not want to try to distance myself from/blame Ron because he is a friend, so I did not emphasize that distinction. I believe this answers Al as well."



.

Leon,
I believe its post 688 and no it didnt answer what I asked. But If YOU want me to let it go his silence has answered the question for me..

While my name holds zero gravitas - at least on this board, my kids think I'm a god..:p, can I ask this?

Daniel Enright

I'm surprised the events we are discussing are murky at all for you, and I understand the 9 years part. You were asked to participate in an illegal and surely uncomfortable for-you situation, one you didn't repeat, and from my reading of your posts over the years, its an act that wouldn't have sat right. Generally I feel your call on this board is for the greater good, the moral and ethical right to win out.
So such an even should have seared itself into you mind.
I'm 47, and at age 15 stole a Penthouse magazine from a store, getting caught on the way out. I can see it all very easily right now, my school uniform, which side of my jacket I put the magazine behind, the point at which the owner called for me to stop as I sidled out the door. I had to go to the police station, have my mum pick me up.....I never stole a thing again in my life.
I can't un-remember it.

The part of your story, and what happens to all stories if they contain any innacuracies, is as you tell them over and over aspects that don't jive start to stand out.

Originally you described the action as a single bid, meant to act as a minimum amount your friend Ron would accept. I think you allowed the number of bids, and how you framed it in your mind as a minimum, to mitigate the whole sordid action to yourself. Ron was simply protecting himself from being ripped off by a low offer.

You just now said in your last post, you are unsure of how many bids were placed?
You can see how that would change everything, from setting a minimum to an active effort to shill up another bidder.
I also have a feeling you would have followed the auction more than just casually, to know how it turned out and because it was a moral car crash - it would have been hard to avert your eyes.

Is there a chance you more accurately remember how the item was bid on, on reflection?
Did you talk to Ron afterwards, tell him how uncomfortable it made you feel, that it was once off?
Knowing AH rules of the time and now, I would also think this memory would have followed you for years, especially as a lawyer and knowing what could happed to your life's work if you were found to have acted illegally......

I realize it's easier to talk in modified short responses as you have so far, and I actually am with you in what you've said so far about at least fronting the pitchforks while others pathetically hide their involvement.
But it would be helpful to believe you as a fellow human being, if you took a few more words to tell the story so far untold.
About what the act meant to you then and now, and whether you are really so equivocal in judging it today?
You knew it was wrong then, otherwise you would have asked the AH to simply advertise what was being done and be transparent about it......so why so gray today?

//

So YES didn't answer the question? How about NO or Maybe? I don't care what you do it just seems like he answered the question but you keep on keeping on. He let Ron use his account one way or the other. The rest is semantics and I didn't see him lie or anything else about it. He told the truth. He admitted a mistake was made. What more do you want?

Rob Gordy
tiger8mush@yahoo.com
looking for E121s with a "Lou Gertenrich" back if you have any :)

Leon,
No problem I know he is your friend... Its like you and the Peck + Snyder incident. I know you didnt like it very much and I myself never once commented on it to you. But hay if you want to pencil whip me out of here to as I have always told you no problem.. I had stopped making comments as you know long ago on these posts BUT when a LAWYER came on and Im sorry really didnt tell the truth (the full truth) and did the dance well someone had to call this individual out. So I guess it was me.. Do what you will. I really dont care. Just wanted to stick up for the right side of the law...

I didn't like the P & S issue especially because I did absolutely nothing wrong. Just a small difference. Peter admits he made a mistake. I didn't admit anything except I am out a Peck and Sndyer I bought at auction. There really wasn't anything else except in peoples imaginations. But prefer not to discuss that here, now.

Not to make this thread all about Peter, but to clarify, he actually didn't tell the truth or admit a mistake was made, did he? This is a long thread so I legitimately might have missed it when he said it was a mistake. I hope he did and I just didn't see it. I know that he did say, "I don't view myself as a shill bidder, nor do I believe Ron did anything inappropriate." I read that as the exact opposite of admitting a mistake.

That was from his initial post in this thread. The one where, as he says, he "came on here perfectly willing to be transparent." The way he demonstrated that transparency was to lie about it and say that he was asked to bid for Ron, and he agreed to do it. Ron later posted that he was the one bidding on his own item, using Peter's account. It's not that different either way, but it's also not just semantics. One story was the truth, one was a lie. Maybe we have different ideas about what transparency means.

Again, there are far worse offenders than Peter, but Peter still belongs on the list. Coming on here and lying about it didn't make him look less guilty. Actually transparency and remorse might have gone a long way.

-Ryan

And Leon,
Like I said I never once made any comment on that issue whether I thought it was right or wrong but somewhere down the line you made a decision to return it. Whether it was right or wrong YOU made that decision and that was your choice. But when this thread started someone came on and made a long statement, then his friend came on and made another long statement., in both statements there were inconsistency, and all I wanted was to clear up some very simple points. Thats all but when the party started to do the dance well thats when I pushed for the truth. Peter I hope you sleep well every night and never stop standing up for truth justice and the american way! I salute you sir...

Your points would resonate much more if less attention were drawn to your continued butchering of the English language...most notably in this instance the difference between weather and whether. And for the life of me I cant find inconsintences anywhere in the dictionary, its almost some sort of contraction.

Rob G$the#l

It is a cross between inconsistent and incontinence. Tough situation to be in.

"Will I need adult diapers for this?"
"Depends."

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

:)