Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
No, of course not. That's a stupid question. And every grading company agrees, as evidenced by their actions, despite what you may think their policies are based on some PR social media response they might put out to assuage you and others of your ilk.
The grading companies know that the majority of collectors think cleaning cards is perfectly acceptable. They also know that a significant faction of the hobby is comprised of people like yourself who are vehemently opposed to it, because some people just fear the boogeyman. They know the hobby is divided. Their goal is to play the middle. They don't want to pick sides. They don't want to alienate a significant proportion of their customers. That's why they put out all the double-speak. One minute you have Peter from SGC saying, "as long as there is nothing physical remaining on the card that we can detect, then it's OK" and Ryan Hoge effectively endorsing Kurt's Card Care one week by saying, "we know that Kurt's Card Care was used on the Wemby 1 of 1 but we're going to stand by our assessment of the card" and then decertifying one of Kurt's submissions the next week and Ryan saying he doesn't like people "manipulating" cards in his interview with Geoff Wilson. They're trying to appease everyone. They're trying to play the middle, and apparently they're doing it well.
But at the end of the day, their true policy is only measurable by their outcomes. They know the Gretzky Wagner was trimmed because Mastro testified to it under oath, and yet they haven't decertified it. They also know that every single 1986 Fleer sticker card that has ever been submitted to them without wax on back has had that wax removed, because ALL 86 Fleer stickers come with wax on them. Not some. ALL. They also know that all these old 1914 cracker jack cards that don't have stains on them have been cleaned, yet they still grade them as numeric. The same with all the old hot dog cards without the hot dog water stains. They know they were cleaned, yet they still grade them. The same with all the 48 Leaf cards with non-foxed borders. They know how acidic that card stock is and how that affects foxing over time, yet they give numeric grades to those cards every time knowing they've been conserved (and the same is true with other sets printed on high wood pulp fiber card stock). They also know when a card was soaked to remove it from a scrapbook every time a vintage card gets submitted with glue residue and surface abrasions on the back. Yet they allow that as well. Numeric grade every time. Sometimes even relatively high grades like with Orlando's now infamous pre-war boxing card (which most definitely did show evidence of having been removed from a scrapbook at the time of submission yet still received a 6). I could give endless examples of cards that you and your friends should all take issue with (if you're being consistent with your criticisms) but that are completely standard practice in this hobby and always have been.
At the end of the day, the fact of the matter remains, whether you like it or not, that it is acceptable to clean and soak cards in this hobby, as long as you're not using some harsh chemicals that alter them in some way (like soaking cards in a bucket of bleach, leaving them brittle and faded).
There are perfectly safe ways to clean and restore a card that do not damage them at all and that do not leave anything behind on the card, and that do not affect the integrity of the card stock. Just because you don't know how it can be done doesn't mean it can't be. And furthermore, when done properly, it even preserves and prolongs the lifespans of those cards.
You can try to change the discussion back to, "that's fine, but what I'm demanding is just disclosure", but we all know that's a bullshit red herring. What you really want is anyone who views this topic differently from you to be kicked out of the hobby. You want them publicly tarred and feathered. You want them all to be "canceled". But if cleaning cards, removing wax, and soaking cards to remove them from scrapbooks are acceptable practices in this hobby, then there is nothing to disclose when doing so because these acts do not have a material effect on the value of the cards. And you can't just say that it's OK to remove wax from this card but not from that one, or that it's OK to soak this card on water but not that one, or that it's OK for cards manufacturers to remove stray ink marks from the backs of player signed cards caused by athletes stacking them before they dry while signing (and yes, they ALL do this using rubbing alcohol) but it's not OK for a collector to do it. You have to be consistent.
|
So yes you are jackies_and_jordans and no you don’t think removing stains is altering if done your way, but if done the “wrong way” then it is altering. That’s what I got from your response.
Then you went on a long tantrum. Let’s focus back on what you claim is your acceptable cleaning method for removing stains from cards.
On here you just stated you use distilled water. Why on my Instagram post, that showed a stained removed on a card you sold, did you flip flop all over the place about how the stain was removed?
You first said it was soaked in kryptonite. Then said it was just the scanner settings. Then said you rinsed the dirt off with ordinary tap water and it was the scanner settings. Then blocked everyone that questioned the methods you said you used. Seems like a lot of unnecessary BS if you just soaked it in distilled water.
In fact, I even stated that if it was just distilled water then we wouldn’t even be having a debate about the card. In your repeated post you referenced water, but never once mentioned distilled water.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
05-09-2024, 05:43 PM
.
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
