View Single Post
  #6  
Old 10-15-2024, 12:43 PM
G1911 G1911 is offline
Gr.eg McCl.@y
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 7,421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balticfox View Post
Speaking of crap, you have a long history in that regard. Recognize these words?



I'm glad I didn't step in that one.



Sorry, but I'm one of those people who believes that a quoted transcript should contain the words of the person ostensibly quoted. And the "transcript" of your words you tried to quote contained only mine. Now I understand that you may be computer challenged or that a touch of senility might be settling in, but I can only suggest that you get some help with the QUOTE feaure.



Speaking of stupidity:



Try rephrasing that sentence in the standard English grammar you were taught in fifth grade.



"Objective?" The only objective evidence we have so far is that PSA doesn't stand by their original assessment of the card. (Surprise, surprise.) You can hold your breath for a further update from PSA if you want, but I suspect PSA will just try to sweep this one under the carpet with their other mistakes.



I'll leave getting "upset" about the Lajoie card to you.



1. I've lied about no transcripts.

2. Nor have I told "people" to fuck off. For one thing "people" is plural. (Another English lesson for you.) I merely quoted another poster's considered opinion of your (singular) best course of action. I am though certainly coming around to his way of thinking.

Incidentally, have you ever consdered contributing positively to this board? Should I QUOTE some examples for you?



If you want to do the cross thread stalking to strip context and attack, you should already know I cede any argument of virtue to the other person. I am the worst man alive. Anyways, this is 100% factually true regardless of how upsetting it is for you:

Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911 View Post
Just in case this claim was serious - this card is just a Fritsch reprint, which was not produced for fraudulent purposes, altered by somebody else to look old. That's why the lines are how they are, matching the Fritsch copy. This is not from 1916-1917. It is not from the Philippines. It is not copyright infringement from over a century ago.
Reply With Quote