Forum Member Dilemma

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Hope you all have your popcorn ready!

I am the member being discussed here.

The site registration. Yup, I totally entered fake info. Guilty. When I first heard of this site (mentioned in a reddit comment), I wanted simply to check it out, and when prompted to enter a bunch of personal info (as so many websites do these days), I entered the first thing that came to mind - a portmanteau of two Mets players from my youth.

I added my real name to my signature/avatar/whatever-it's-called probably sometime last year. I have no problem sharing any info with Leon or anyone else at this point, as I now know that this is not some spammy website that wants to sell my data, but a community of real people, many of whom have met each other in person. Had I thought to retroactively change it in the system, and had I known it was possible (I'm not sure if it is), I would have. I fully accept it if Leon and/or others come to view this as a form of irredeemable deception. I certainly regret it, if for no other reason than that it will have caused some in here to doubt my integrity.

The returned card. Not guilty by reason of being a moron.

Some background: the member who was selling this card, whom I'll call "Dave" (not their real name) and I have done B/S/T deals prior to the one being discussed, and have had what I have viewed as great relationship, talking cards generally and such. He even referred to me another member when I asked him about some cards, and I later ended up purchasing some from this other member. (This is relevant to what I write later on.)

The transaction: Yes, as unlikely it seems many responding to this thread will believe, I truly thought was a crack in the slab. I have attached more pictures to show how it looked from other angles. I feel incredibly stupid knowing how we got to this point, but that it what I'm guilty of.

Had I simply had buyer's remorse (I didn't, as the card itself was nicer than in the pictures Dave had sent me, and it was a HOFer at a fair price), I would have simply told him so, and with confidence that he would have gladly accepted it back.

So, I took these photos (within minutes of opening the package) and send them to Dave, asking him what he wants to do. He acknowledged the perceived slab damage when I sent him the photos, and apologized. He asked me to send it back so that he could make a USPS insurance claim. I immediately shipped it back to him (about one week ago) and sent him the tracking number.

I woke up Monday to find that Leon had banned my account, and had no idea why. Dave had not contacted me when he received the card back. Had he done so, I would have gladly accepted the card back and paid the shipping. When Leon explained to me the reasons for the account ban, I contacted Dave again and he had this to say:

"I almost had sent the claim off to the post office too but wanted to snap one last pic before I did...glad I did."

I wrote back to him that, despite his being apparently convinced that I intentionally "faked" a damaged slab (it would never have occurred to me to do that, nor do I understand what it is I would have been trying to accomplish by doing so), I find notable the fact that that he also, with the card in hard, thought it was damaged until the very last second before mailing it out. (And Dave has been in the hobby for decades, as opposed to me, who never handled a slabbed card until early 2020!)

As far as my reputation, I have done deals on here with everyone listed in my signature, and I am confident that not one of them will have a single bad thing to say about me.

That's about all for now I suppose. Whatever Leon and/or the group decides, I have enjoyed being a part of this community and I wish you all the best.

Matthew (my real name)

I originally voted to ban, but after reading this I have changed my mind. The name thing with the site registration is bone headed, but if Leon banned people for bone headed things I would have been banned a long time ago (as with many others too). FWIW, there is another member that uses a fake name and I have even PM'd the admins about it, but he continues to use that name. Note sure why something hasn't been done, but I don't run the site.

As far as the card return, the explanation sounds plausible to me. I don't think it was a case of buyer's remorse.

That's just my $.02

[JollyElm]

I am of the mind that he should stay, but how about clipping those frickin' nails, guy?????

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

I am of the mind that he should stay, but how about clipping those frickin' nails, guy?????

funny but agree

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I originally voted to ban, but after reading this I have changed my mind. The name thing with the site registration is bone headed, but if Leon banned people for bone headed things I would have been banned a long time ago (as with many others too). FWIW, there is another member that uses a fake name and I have even PM'd the admins about it, but he continues to use that name. Note sure why something hasn't been done, but I don't run the site.

As far as the card return, the explanation sounds plausible to me. I don't think it was a case of buyer's remorse.

That's just my $.02

FWIW there are several including one with multiple fake names.

This is not the same Mathew I referred to in my other post.

I vote we let him stay. Others have done WAY worse without being banned.

[DeanH3]

After hearing his side and seeing all the deals he's already made with long time members, I voted No. I still believe some BST restriction should be implemented.

Matthew must realize that some may still be skeptical of dealing with him in the future if he is allowed back on the BST.

[John1941]

I originally voted that he should be banned, but after reading his post I'm more willing to let him stay.

[Jobu]

Both of these mistakes are certainly plausible/understandable, so I vote that we let him stay.

He should also rebuy that card now that we know there are no issues with the holder, and pay for the shipping back to him.

[Carter08]

I voted to ban early on and would like to change that vote. Also, can someone add some backstory about the Wagner pic. Very interested.

[scooter729]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I voted to ban early on and would like to change that vote. Also, can someone add some backstory about the Wagner pic. Very interested.

Guy came on here claiming he had a Wagner to sell. Everyone called BS. He posted this photoshopped pic of himself. We had a field day. The paper towels in the background certainly didn't help his cause.

Folks then proceeded to photoshop him with everything from the Mona Lisa to who knows what else. It was damn funny.

I just tried to find the thread but to no avail - can someone better than me at searching on here find it??

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I voted to ban early on and would like to change that vote. Also, can someone add some backstory about the Wagner pic. Very interested.

Here's one of them.

The Nun's Wagner
https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=163800

[BobC]

Interesting! Amazing how people rush to judgement without knowing all the facts, or being initially presented with only one side/version of a story.

[commishbob]

I'm just kind of disappointed to find out Bobby Strawberry isn't someone's real name.

[japhi]

So buyer upon registration didn't want to enter his personal info. Seems reasonable and I wonder what a full member audit would show, no idea what I entered when joining. Suspect that data is not very accurate.

Continuing, buyer is a good member for a few years, posts under his real name and has consummated multiple deals. Thinks a slab is compromised and agrees to a return with seller. Seller, on last inspection, realizes it is actually tape. Instead of reaching out to buyer, contacts forum host to have buyer banned.

Seller doesn't look great here IMO.

[Fred]

I say let him back. The explanation provided seems plausible and I can understand the hesitance to provide any personal information to sign up for a bulletin board.

If "Dave" is good with this and Matthew has provided the real information required to sign up for the board, then call it square and let it be a lesson learned that Matthew realizes that this board is legit.

Just curious, who was the player in the slab?

[scoutsout47]

I, too, believe in second chances, but there’s nothing wrong with a conditional return. On the one hand, he’s expressed seemingly genuine interest in returning to our community and demonstrated some measure of humility by contacting Leon directly with hat in hand. A certified scumbag grifter likely would’ve abstained from returning to the scene of the crime, particularly to face added scrutiny over their actions. Conversely, I am no fan of cold-feet buyers who cavalierly welch on deals. Had the upstanding seller been in a jam and needed those funds to meet his liabilities, the result would have been far worse.

If, through your good graces, you decided to allow him to reenter this community, I think it might be wise to do so on a probationary level. He’d definitely need some measure of rehabilitation before partaking of the BST boards. Assuming he fully understands the ramifications of what he’s done thus far, the bottom line is that he actually wants to be here to socialize with others and, as many of us do, receive updates on this magnificent hobby.

The last two years have been extraordinarily rough in terms of our social interaction and so these boards may be his only meaningful connection to like-minded enthusiasts. If you see fit to allow reentry, make sure it’s known that he’ll live and die in your shadow. Some of my most loyal soldiers, and now employees, were those whom I dared to offer a second chance.

Just my .02, for what it’s worth.

Jared,

[Snowman]

LOL, the irony. This member has been on my list of banned members for a while now...

[bobbyw8469]

Anyone with two working eyes can clearly see the case isn't cracked. I once had someone on Amazon initiate a return because the case was cracked. Obviously the CD was fine, and those cheap cases can be replaced rather easily. Amazon sided with the buyer. I asked the Amazon rep, if I bought a pair of shoes, and the box they came in was damaged could I get a refund? Basically she said I could. The buyers have WAYYYYYYY too much power these days. In this instance, the buyer was being a hardass, and I wouldn't want to sell to him.

[LEHR]

Based on what I read I voted to reinstate.

A. It's very plausible that not listing his name on the registration was a simple mistake, especially considering the persons name was listed under their ID.

B. While mistaking tape for a crack is definitely a boneheaded move, the fact that the buyer offered to make good on the deal makes me believe that there was no ill intent intended.

Just my $0.02.