Quote:
Originally Posted by slidekellyslide
How should it have been handled?
-A Ball was purchased on ebay for ~$25 by a member of this forum from another member of this forum.
-This ball later shows up with new stitching and is being sold as a very rare AS game baseball.
-When a check of that ebay ID is done it is revealed to be associated with Brandon.
-Brandon refuses to answer any questions regarding this baseball and says that it was all some former business associate of his whom he will not name.
I guess we were all supposed to just shut up at that point and move along.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecatspajamas
One thing that I have always appreciated about how Leon handles tough situations of he said/she said is by reaching out to the accused with a phone call to at least get their side of the story before handing down any judgements. I wonder, of all of Brandon's accusers, how many of you reached out to Brandon to get his side of the story? For that matter, how many have ever spoken to him personally. I daresay if you actually knew him as anything more than "the ball guy," you would not be so quick to judge.
|
Dan, Brandon answered a LOT of questions about the ball and his relationship with the seller. The one question that he did not answer is
the name of his friend selling the ball, and I realize that irks you. You have made it very clear, in this situation and others, that not naming names is one of your pet peeves. Brandon gave his reasons for not giving his friend's name, and given the circumstances, I think you should be able to understand his reluctance to do so even if you don't agree with his decision. (And just for the record, I don't know the name of the seller either.)
I still think that if you or any of the other accusers had taken the time to reach out to Brandon personally
before ripping him a new one in a public forum, you would be much more likely to get the straight answer everyone
said they wanted. I simply cannot see how publicly subjecting a board member to one accusation after another in order to drag some sort of confession out of him piece by piece, not talking to him personally to get his side of the story
before going public, and continuing to rip him even after the situation has been resolved can possibly be "how it should have been handled."
Just please, before you string someone up for something that "smells fishy," take a couple of minutes to ask them the pertinent questions and get their side of the story, especially when it's a board member. By no means should we stop investigating fraud in the hobby and policing ourselves, but I think we owe our fellow board members at least that courtesy. At this point, I think anything else I say would just be repeating myself, and I should heed my own advice to just let it drop. If anyone wants to discuss this or any other matter further, you know where to find me.
Lance F!ttr0