Poll for Buying Cards with Chemically Removed Stains

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I have a strange feeling some of the people voting in the second category would not vote that way if their screen names were attached to their votes. But since they aren't, it's a safe way to skew the numbers.

I say this because- realistically- this poll just says "chemically cleaned". It does not even give a specific type of chemical. Really? So, you guys are telling me that "in general", a card can have been cleaned with any "unknown chemical" and this wouldn't influence your decision to buy it? I'm calling B/S.

"Hey, this card has been cleaned with chemicals-no, you don't get to know what kind- but L@@K AT HOW IT POPS!!!!!!!" WOW!!!!!" Place your bids and hurry, this is going to go fast!!!"

Turpentine, acetone, bleach, lighter fluid, etc........no, it would not influence my decision to purchase a card. As long as I can't tell, who cares. No, I'm not sure that it won't fall apart 15 years from now, but who cares? By then, someone else will probably own it anyways-right?

Give me a break.

At least some of you came out and gave your opinions-which even though I may not agree, I respect your opinion and willingness to explain your position on this. But, it's only been a few.

Or, maybe my perception is off-I've always assumed collectors of pre-war cards were 100% against using chemicals on these 100+ year old gems.....

Sincerely, Clayton

Some of us (well at least I know this is true for myself) believe it has been discussed enough between this and the thread this one evolved from that we don't have the need to keep the debate going, but voted anyways. I know all the arguments both ways, now it is just interesting to see how many people vote each way.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

I know all the arguments both ways, now it is just interesting to see how many people vote each way.

It would be more interesting to see who voted which way. I cannot believe that that many people would not let the fact that a card has been chemically cleaned *with any unknown chemical* influence their decision to buy the card. Just not buying it.

Sincerely, Clayton

[Bpm0014]

Thanks Clayton. I was not trying to be difficult whatsoever. I just have no plans of selling any; they are simply a conversation piece. So if they are cleaned (or even trimmed) I'll take them! Haha.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Bpm0014

Thanks Clayton. I was not trying to be difficult whatsoever. I just have no plans of selling any; they are simply a conversation piece. So if they are cleaned (or even trimmed) I'll take them! Haha.

I fully understand and didn't take it any other way. Your honesty is appreciated. At least with a trimmed card you know what you are getting though

Sincerely, Clayton

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

It would be more interesting to see who voted which way. I cannot believe that that many people would not let the fact that a card has been chemically cleaned *with any unknown chemical* influence their decision to buy the card. Just not buying it.

Sincerely, Clayton

Why? So you can PM every person who disagreed with you? I just don't see the need.

Also to be technical the poll wasn't about "any uknown chemical" it just said chemicals. Since not everyone even agrees with the definition of EVERY dictionary on what a chemical is. It is very possible that a lot of people are voting yes because water is a chemical (no matter what anyone here says to the contrary). Now if the poll was worded differently it could have different results matching more what you expected to see.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Why? So you can PM every person who disagreed with you? I just don't see the need.



Also to be technical the poll wasn't about "any uknown chemical" it just said chemicals. Since not everyone even agrees with the definition of EVERY dictionary on what a chemical is. It is very possible that a lot of people are voting yes because water is a chemical (no matter what anyone here says to the contrary). Now if the poll was worded differently it could have different results matching more what you expected to see.

Clayton just likes to stir the pot.

[Rich Klein]

You know, I don't think it truly matters very much. We want to buy the cards that look and feel right and if the chemical removal is proper and helps that, it is our business as to what we buy,

Look it's the same argument as trimming and tell me, who would not buy the Wagner PSA8 card. C'mon now, if you could afford that card you would but that Wagner because it looked and felt so good

Rich

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

Look it's the same argument as trimming and tell me, who would not buy the Wagner PSA8 card. C'mon now, if you could afford that card you would but that Wagner because it looked and felt so good

Rich

Rich, I think you just tied yourself in a knot.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

Clayton just likes to stir the pot.

I wouldn't make a generic comment about Clayton like that.

I just happen to disagree with him on this matter. There have been other debates I have seen him in here where I agree with him and there are several times he isn't debating anything and just discussing cards.

There are other people on the thread that I believe do just like to stir the pot, I just wouldn't lump Clayton into that category.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

I wouldn't make a generic comment about Clayton like that.

I just happen to disagree with him on this matter. There have been other debates I have seen him in here where I agree with him and there are several times he isn't debating anything and just discussing cards.

There are other people on the thread that I believe do just like to stir the pot, I just wouldn't lump Clayton into that category.

Thanks Andy, I appreciate that. We don't have to agree, and I respect your opinion. I think I'm getting too emotionally involved in this subject, and I've said my piece. Thanks again.

Sincerely, Clayton

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards

Clayton just likes to stir the pot.

Glad to see that you know me so well. By the way, you keep forgetting your hashtag's when you make your posts.

Sincerely, Clayton

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Glad to see that you know me so well. By the way, you keep forgetting your hashtag's when you make your posts.



Sincerely, Clayton

Keep stirring the pot. #HereYouGo

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Why? So you can PM every person who disagreed with you? I just don't see the need.

Also to be technical the poll wasn't about "any uknown chemical" it just said chemicals. Since not everyone even agrees with the definition of EVERY dictionary on what a chemical is. It is very possible that a lot of people are voting yes because water is a chemical (no matter what anyone here says to the contrary). Now if the poll was worded differently it could have different results matching more what you expected to see.

What would be the point of PM'ing every person who disagreed with me? I'm failing to see the logic there. Maybe because I buy cards? Maybe because I'd like to know who is ok with chemically altering cards? Some people may be ok collecting cards that have been known to have been cleaned with chemicals, and never plan to sell them. But, if they run into unfortunate situations in life, they may have to sell. If they did sell- I (as a buyer) would like to know that they (as a collector) didn't mind chemical alterations. Disclosure. Honesty. On the same token, if it were a person who strictly sells cards, I want to know, for the same reasons. That's why. I hope that makes sense.

Yes, "technically" the poll just said "chemicals". To me, since NONE were specified, I use a blanket description of "any unknown chemicals". That's what we are talking about, right? UNKNOWN CHEMICALS.

Hey, why don't you PM anyone on this thread who publicly stated they are ok with chemicals........and ask if they received a PM from me yet.

Sincerely, Clayton

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

What would be the point of PM'ing every person who disagreed with me? I'm failing to see the logic there. Maybe because I buy cards? Maybe because I'd like to know who is ok with chemically altering cards? Some people may be ok collecting cards that have been known to have been cleaned with chemicals, and never plan to sell them. But, if they run into unfortunate situations in life, they may have to sell. If they did sell- I (as a buyer) would like to know that they (as a collector) didn't mind chemical alterations. Disclosure. Honesty. On the same token, if it were a person who strictly sells cards, I want to know, for the same reasons. That's why. I hope that makes sense.

Yes, "technically" the poll just said "chemicals". To me, since NONE were specified, I use a blanket description of "any unknown chemicals". That's what we are talking about, right? UNKNOWN CHEMICALS.

Hey, why don't you PM anyone on this thread who publicly stated they are ok with chemicals........and ask if they received a PM from me yet.

Sincerely, Clayton

The question about PMing was a facetious question as I really don't see why it matters. I know you aren't PMing people as I haven't received one.

As pointed out earlier, though, cleaning isn't disclosed in most cases. So people on both sides of the debate have cleaned cards in their collection. So again knowing whom would buy if it was disclosed doesn't mean anything when it comes to buying. And sense there is that misconception that only people that are OK with buying cleaned cards are the ones that own cleaned cards, may be the same reason they don't want the transparency in this poll.

[T2069bk]

I am happy to listen to both sides of the argument. But at issue is would you buy a "cleansed" card.

No one disagrees that the failure to disclose in search of extending profits is unethical as has been continuosly discussed, but as I read the responses I can't help but feel that the undercurrent of that argument includes that if you would buy them you are unethical as well.

These cards are not in their natural state anyway - they have been through all sorts of stuff over time. What is a little maintenance on them?

I buy food that is not organic - so I am not in my original state either.
My house no longer has lead paint- it is not original.
I had some scratches on my car buffed out - it is not original.
I lost a button on a sweater and sewed a new one on - it is not original
Why are pieces of cardboard the line in the sand?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by T2069bk

I am happy to listen to both sides of the argument. But at issue is would you buy a "cleansed" card.

...
Why are pieces of cardboard the line in the sand?

money

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by T2069bk

No one disagrees that the failure to disclose in search of extending profits is unethical as has been continuosly discussed, but as I read the responses I can't help but feel that the undercurrent of that argument includes that if you would buy them you are unethical as well.

I think we have to be careful about judging those who disagree with us, as being unethical, or feeling that those who we disagree with think that we are unethical. I certainly don't think buyers of cleansed cards are unethical, nor do I think many others here do. I've heard some of the most ethical people in our hobby state that they don't mind chemically-cleansed or trimmed cards.

As an aside: Clayton, Alex - what the heck is a 'hash tag'? I keep hearing the ESPN bozos quote tweets, including the word 'hash-tag', which sounds so weird. Are people actually human-talking in text-speak now?!?!?!