Forum Member Dilemma

[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

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Here's one of them.

And here's the thread that started it all. Said he'd had the Nun's Wagner in his family for a long time.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=163782

[JollyElm]

124. Ban of the Year Roast (also Adrianaline Rush)
A thread where people gleefully celebrate a certain member being kicked off of the site.

See also: Defrostracized - when a member is allowed to return after a temporary banning.

[philliesfan]

I was originally on the fence about this. After giving more thought and his explanation I think a second chance should be in place. I am in his sig line as dealing with and that is correct. I had no problems with the transaction.
Bob

[Carter08]

Thanks for sharing the Wagner story!

[egri]

Looking at the pictures of Andrew holding the Wagner, does anyone else see a gap between his thumb and the slab? If he had actually been holding it that way, he would've dropped it.

[ullmandds]

i initially voted to ban...ive changed my mind

[effe]

Originally Posted by egri

Looking at the pictures of Andrew holding the Wagner, does anyone else see a gap between his thumb and the slab? If he had actually been holding it that way, he would've dropped it.

He probably hadn't used the paper towels at that point and it just stuck there.

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Here's one of them.

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

Not gonna lie, first time I read this I read Nut's Wagner....

B. T.

[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.

[hcv123]

My opinion.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by 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.

Yes and no. Most times the "aggrieved" party in a case like this isn't willing to come on and share their side of the story. The fact that he did, and is willing to take some lumps, speaks volumes about him. Life isn't a often doesn't provide perfect information, sometimes you have to make judgements with less than ideal info. Of course those judgements don't have to be irreversible. I would change my vote on this subject.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Yes and no. Most times the "aggrieved" party in a case like this isn't willing to come on and share their side of the story. The fact that he did, and is willing to take some lumps, speaks volumes about him. Life isn't a often doesn't provide perfect information, sometimes you have to make judgements with less than ideal info. Of course those judgements don't have to be irreversible. I would change my vote on this subject.

Hi Scott,

Don't disagree at all, but you can understand how this looks. The fact that so many people were quick to jump to a decision based on only partial information, and then quickly changed their minds when presented with more input, is downright scary. This is exactly how a vast majority of people around the globe seem to operate in today's world with regard to half-truths, fake news, misinformation, and so on. They take what information they are given, and often make hasty, not well-informed decisions based on what partial or little they do know. I intentionally did not vote or offer an answer as I was well aware I possibly did not have all the facts, nor had a chance to have heard both sides of the story, before making a truly informed decision.

As you state, people do this all the time though, and it can very often result in extremely negative results, and even matters of life and death. Look at what is going on in Ukraine, and the supposed misinformation behind at least some of the reasoning for the invasion. Does anyone think the entirety of the Russian population really knows the whole, true story of what is going on? Thank goodness the issue of this thread has no such dire and real world consequences associated with it. But still, it is indicative of human nature and how people can rush to conclusions without taking the time to gather and look at ALL the information first (assuming they'll at some point actually be given all the information), and then actually think about what it all means and the consequences of their decision, before actually making a decision.

Granted, people don't always have the luxury to take their time to make their decisions, but that is certainly not true in this instance. And fortunately, there is no negative, lasting effect or dire consequences that result from people going back and now changing their mind in this particular case. But all too often, such quick and ill-informed decision making, when it isn't necessary, can result in much harm and damage to others, and may not be entirely reversible. I would pray that ALL people could be more cognizant of what they are doing and how they go about making such decisions, without possibly being too quick to decide, and end up making a bad decision as a result.

The saying, "Judge not, lest ye be judged.", would also seem to be very apropos here. Or put another way, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I've often heard Ebay sellers complain when getting negative feedback that they were never contacted by the buyer beforehand, but wished they had been so they could have resolved the issue without it escalating further. I would hope that such thinking should go both ways.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by BobC

Hi Scott,

The fact that so many people were quick to jump to a decision based on only partial information, and then quickly changed their minds when presented with more input, is downright scary. This is exactly how a vast majority of people around the globe seem to operate in today's world with regard to half-truths, fake news, misinformation, and so on.

I disagree with this sentiment vehemently. I see little evidence of anyone, in the context you are speaking of, changing their mind about anything.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by 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.

Nobody did anything wrong. Leon asked for people's opinions and he supplied the information he thought was necessary.

[commishbob]

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

[perezfan]

I initially voted to ban him, but changed my mind. I thought his explanation was plausible, genuine and contrite. Moving forward, I do not think he will be a detriment to this forum, and would like to see him stick around.

[icurnmedic]

All are plausible excuses.
If he was trying a scam, maybe not send the card back?
Intentionally damage the case?
Switch card out?

As far as the registration, sometimes I feel hesitant to put personal information on a random site that I just wanted to get a feel for. Then as time goes on you forget, or think what you registered was okay?

I voted let stay, but I voted after he responded.

FWIW , I loathe a cheat,liar,and thief. I do Not think that is what we have here.
And finally, I have never dealt with this person.
Thomas

[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.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 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.

Totally not true. The seller wasn't in a panic or have his panties in a wad. He didn't ask me to ban him at all., He was just giving a heads up which I always appreciate.
The problem I see, so far, is the lying on the registration. That is going to result in something punitive. I am awaiting one more piece of info before I make the decision.
Anyone lying, for any reason, on their registration is going to get reprimanded at minimum, and possibly banned. IF you don't lie it's not a problem. And I understand why he did it.
I will be contacting other members who, I have been told, are going by something other than their real name.
As for the slab issue, I am in the camp of a non believer but I could be wrong. There is an unwritten policy on the forum whereby if no one is out any money, and the situation isn't persistent, then there is leniency given.
I appreciate folks understanding on this matter.

[pawpawdiv9]

ride a tricyle, a beanie hat, and a Net54 shirt while honking a horn at the national card show. --thats unless someone already volunteered for that.

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by pawpawdiv9

ride a tricyle, a beanie hat, and a Net54 shirt while honking a horn at the national card show. --thats unless someone already volunteered for that.

When the day comes that I ever actually go to a national, put my name in the hat for this. Just make it a Knight Rider big wheel instead of a tricycle though. I never got to ride one of those.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Leon

As for the slab issue, I am in the camp of a non believer but I could be wrong.

I believe the buyer honestly thought the slab was cracked. He took pictures of the “crack” and I assume these pictures were to show the seller. If he was trying to pull one over on the seller, he wouldn’t have known the seller didn’t know it was tape.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I believe the buyer honestly thought the slab was cracked. He took pictures of the “crack” and I assume these pictures were to show the seller. If he was trying to pull one over on the seller, he wouldn’t have known the seller didn’t know it was tape.

Or worse, if he was a bad guy he could've taken a pliers and actually cracked the case to guarantee the return would be accepted.

I just can't see the tape/crack is an issue.

[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...

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Snowman

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

Net54's (likely) most ignored commenter has his own personal "banned" list. LOL, the irony!

[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.