After paying their dues, should hobbyists who committed fraud be allowed back ?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Maybe the reason for my gut distinction is that the Mantle hypo is face to face, but the Wagner isn't, and there's no deal to be made, the book owner has already given up the book? Not sure.

Fair enough I can understand that reasoning.

[JollyElm]

A new phrase for everyone wanting to allow this to happen...

Caveat Letthescumbagscausemayhemptor

[Snowman]

I realize that this viewpoint is almost certainly in the minority here, but in my view, there isn't much distance between anything Bill Mastro ever did and being the guy who knowingly purchases a million dollar card for $50 from some innocent lady who inherited it from her father (or however else she acquired it) and just didn't know what it was worth. Whether or not something is punishable by law has no bearing on whether its right or wrong. It is theft under any definition of the word that should matter, regardless of what your dictionary or your background in law has to say on the matter.

[G1911]

Mastro did not simply take advantage of huge bargains when the opportunity presented itself, like a dumb seller selling a Mantle for $50 or a book dealer selling a card they don’t know is in the book to a buyer.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by G1911

Mastro did not simply take advantage of huge bargains when the opportunity presented itself, like a dumb seller selling a Mantle for $50 or a book dealer selling a card they don’t know is in the book to a buyer.

My point wasn't to make what Mastro did sound less serious than it was. My point was to state that I think being the $50 buyer of the million dollar card places one on par with the likes of Mastro. I think it's every bit as criminal. Perhaps even worse.

[Exhibitman]

I'd take advantage of every lucky strike I can. Any seller who is offering an item for sale without knowing what it is or what is in it is foolish. Not the same as knowingly cheating collectors for years. But we don't need to get into these complex hypotheticals because the question is really simple: do we want people who've greatly and intentionally harmed so many collectors to post here? IMO, no. It isn't a tough line to draw. Card doctors, shillers, dishonest sellers and auctioneers, forgers...

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I'd take advantage of every lucky strike I can. Any seller who is offering an item for sale without knowing what it is or what is in it is foolish. Not the same as knowingly cheating collectors for years. But we don't need to get into these complex hypotheticals because the question is really simple: do we want people who've greatly and intentionally harmed so many collectors to post here? IMO, no. It isn't a tough line to draw. Card doctors, shillers, dishonest sellers and auctioneers, forgers...

Adam,

Thanks for trying to get this thread back on track. It really is spinning out of control with all these hypotheticals. I also say no to hobby criminals that have been caught, convicted and gone to prison for their crimes.



.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Snowman

My point wasn't to make what Mastro did sound less serious than it was. My point was to state that I think being the $50 buyer of the million dollar card places one on par with the likes of Mastro. I think it's every bit as criminal. Perhaps even worse.

Comparing buying a card at a bargain price to what Mastro did, indeed declaring taking advantage of a bargain is worse, is absolutely making what Mastro did “sound less serious than it was”. This is not what Mastro did, not even close. I find it difficult to believe a single member here has never paid below market for a card and taken advantage of a seller pricing something low.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Comparing buying a card at a bargain price to what Mastro did, indeed declaring taking advantage of a bargain is worse, is absolutely making what Mastro did “sound less serious than it was”. This is not what Mastro did, not even close. I find it difficult to believe a single member here has never paid below market for a card and taken advantage of a seller pricing something low.

But now you're attacking a straw man, Travis didn't say it's criminal/immoral to buy a card at a bargain price, his observation on its face was limited to the extreme example of paying someone $50 for a million dollar card which could only take place under circumstances where the seller had absolutely no clue what they had and was probably infirm in some way, not just made a mistake.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

But now you're attacking a straw man, Travis didn't say it's criminal/immoral to buy a card at a bargain price, his observation on its face was limited to the extreme example of paying someone $50 for a million dollar card which could only take place under circumstances where the seller had absolutely no clue what they had and was probably infirm in some way, not just made a mistake.

Buying a card for $50 when a seller offers it to you for that, when it is worth a million, is, very literally and exactly "buy[ing] a card at a bargain price". It's an extreme example, but that is precisely what it is. Thus, it is not a straw man at all. Nice try.

I see you've added an 'infirmity' into the mix, after the fact now. This does not seem at all relevant to what was said before you added this element in. EDIT: The original post very clearly states in the example that it is an uninformed seller, not a mentally addled one.

I am happy to be informed what crime this is. I have never seen a law that if somebody offers me something worth X% more than their asking price that it is criminal for me to buy it. I would love to be shown such a law in the US.