How about some answers for this? Where are you Peter Nash?

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by travrosty

then why include the cease and desist letter when the poster of such letter has had many of them sent to himself in care of this very website?

Do you have any comment about the fact that Mr. Nash has committed $760,000 worth of fraud?

Ken

[markf31]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Do you have any comment about the fact that Mr. Nash has committed $760,000 worth of fraud?

Ken

Ken, now that's just a silly question! 145 posts into this thread and Travis has yet to acknowledge or comment on the fraud charges that Mr. Nash himself claimed guilt to... why would Travis start now?

______________
Mark Fox

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Do you have any comment about the fact that Mr. Nash has committed $760,000 worth of fraud?

Ken

Travis, you must have missed my direct question to you, please respond.

Ken

PS: And just in case you think I'm asking this because I'm defending my friends, of all the people Nash has ever talked about on his site, the person I've communicated with the most -- the closest thing I have to a 'friend' from his posts -- is you.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Travis, you must have missed my direct question to you, please respond.

Ken

PS: And just in case you think I'm asking this because I'm defending my friends, of all the people Nash has ever talked about on his site, the person I've communicated with the most -- the closest thing I have to a 'friend' from his posts -- is you.

Ken has he been charged and convicted of fruad?

[earlywynnfan]

Shelly, do you feel he should get a free pass??

[Leon]

Uh, Shelly, actually I believe he admitted to fraud....but I am sure these are all a big, big misunderstanding...

[shelly]

I am not defending him. This is a civil case and everyone one is makeing it out to be a criminal case. I am just defending his right to write and artical no more no less. If you dont want to believe what he writes fine.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by shelly

I am not defending him. This is a civil case and everyone one is makeing it out to be a criminal case. I am just defending his right to write and artical no more no less. If you dont want to belive what he writes fine.

I don't thnk it is an all or nothing proposition in believing what he writes or not. He clearly does a lot of research and he regularly presents readily-varifiable facts.

What is pertinent about his past history of fraudulant behavior is that his writings need to be read more critically. Case in point:

When speaking here about a questionable Ruth baseball (I think it was that, one of the longer threads in the last year), a well-respected poster on these boards posted that he had spoken to several people who didn't think the ball was genuine. I have absolutely no reason to question this person, and his stellar reputation led me to take him at his word.

On the other hand, when Nash writes that "experts" share an opinion that something is or is not genuine, he does not get the benefit of that doubt from me. Travis can say I'm protecting the status quo all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that Nash has lost the right (in my eyes) to make sweeping and anonymous generalizations.

That being said, I hope he continues and takes steps to tighten up his writing and use of sources (and drops the needless, unrelated bashing in his posts). I will keep reading, that's for sure.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Shelly, do you feel he should get a free pass??

If he is guilty of a crime no. Untill that time he is just someone one you dont like and never will. I think there is always two sides to a story. I know Rob reads this site. I would like to hear from him.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by shelly

If he is guilty of a crime no. Untill that time he is just someone one you dont like and never will. I think there is always two sides to a story. I know Rob reads this site. I would like to hear from him.

Everything said so far, against Nash, would pale in comparison to what Rob thinks, trust me.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by shelly

If he is guilty of a crime no. Untill that time he is just someone one you dont like and never will. I think there is always two sides to a story. I know Rob reads this site. I would like to hear from him.

i am with this statement. i remember reading pete's side. Just because people dont like someone, doesnt mean they have a monopoly on the facts.

i looked back at haulsofshame posts, and found this.

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=7968

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by travrosty

i am with this statement. i remember reading pete's side. Just because people dont like someone, doesnt mean they have a monopoly on the facts.
i looked back at haulsofshame posts, and found this.

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=7968

Same thing to you, Travis, in your rants against PSA and JSA.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by shelly

If he is guilty of a crime no. Untill that time he is just someone one you dont like and never will. I think there is always two sides to a story. I know Rob reads this site. I would like to hear from him.

And Shelly, I put it to you that most of the people he writes about fall into the same criteria. So why isn't he fair game here?? I'm sure Nash knows about this thread. I would like to hear from him.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

And Shelly, I put it to you that most of the people he writes about fall into the same criteria. So why isn't he fair game here?? I'm sure Nash knows about this thread. I would like to hear from him.

He is fair game and I would like him to come on here as well. I am not taking sides.As I said from the very begining. I feel that he has every right to write what he wants and you have the same rights not to believe it.