Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
Collector VintageComics private msg quote post Address this user
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.

I'm the dealer that has stated more than once that I've seen 1000's of CBCS books, and that I thought their early books were graded loosely and I still stand by my previous statement based on the high grade SA and BA that I saw at that time.

Bob Storms has also stated it on this forum last week and if you know Bob, he shoots straight as an arrow. We actually discussed it in detail two weeks ago in Orlando as we looked over many books together. I've also heard it from other reputable dealers.

I have friends at both companies but friendship and business are always difficult to separate.

I've been an exclusively CGC dealer because I have familiarity with the company (I've been submitting since 2003) and I believe in the product. But in running a business I have to use the service that I feel is going to make my business the most money.

You might find it amusing to learn that when I joined the CGC chat forum back in 2004 that I also stood up for PGX until I learned more about them. Everyone labeled me a PGX apologist back then too. lol

Since the higher end high grade CBCS SA and BA books I followed in auctions in 2014 - 2015 did not do as well as CGC books over all, I made a decision to stick with CGC early on. That being said, if i feel CBCS's grading has tightened up and I couple that with my concerns about the new CGC case, I may try them out. I've just been too busy lately to do some of my own research.

I don't follow auction results very closely anymore except for bigger books but I did hear about an Amazing Fantasy #15 CBCS 9.0 fetching over $230K in a recent Comic Connect auction. That's a monster result and speaks to how CBCS is being currently perceived and accepted in the higher end.
Post 101 • IP   flag post
Collector Mio private msg quote post Address this user
Comicconnect appears to favour CBCS, I say as I observe that all of the books I saw from the PA Dutch find are in CBCS holders. That is no small endorsement and I imagine increased collector familiarity will inch the prices to about parallel with CGC. Key books already seem more or less there.

I just re-directed a submission from CGC to CBCS on account of the new case issues. Apparently there are many doing the same.
Post 102 • IP   flag post
Collector DannyBoy private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton


IMO pressing is definitely restoration, just not as bad as other restoration. If you use a machine to make a comic look nicer, that's restoration.


This.
Post 103 • IP   flag post
CBCS spaulus private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior. Posts are not removed for disagreements that are kept civil or well spoken concerns.
Post 104 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?
Post 105 • IP   flag post


Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?

Neither. It was more along the lines of a personal attack.
Post 106 • IP   flag post
CBCS Michael private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?

Neither. It was more along the lines of a personal attack.


The moderators are instructed to remove a post if there is vile language, a personal attack, or unacceptable behavior. They are specially instructed not to remove any post that praises or criticizes CBCS or CGC. If you want to know what was posted, you can contact the author and decide for yourself if you agree or disagree. I was told that it was a personal attack. It was important to me when we launched the forum that people can express their opinions in a civilized manner whether we like their opinions or not. My belief is that civil open discussion is better than censure. That is the CBCS difference.
Post 107 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?

Neither. It was more along the lines of a personal attack.


Ok Doc, I guess I'm not remembering the post that well. I was kinda baked when I read it.
Post 108 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael
That is the CBCS difference.


Oh no, please tell me you guys aren't doing that over here like Borock did at CGC :fingerscrossed:


Post 109 • IP   flag post
Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?

Neither. It was more along the lines of a personal attack.


Ok Doc, I guess I'm not remembering the post that well. I was kinda baked when I read it.

There was a second post that got zapped as well. Again, a personal attack. I don't remember if it was in this thread or not.
Post 110 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaulus
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.



The mods did remove a post in this thread. Posts are removed for vile language, personal attacks, or unacceptable behavior.


I saw the post. Which of the three reasons above was the post pulled? For criticizing CBCS or CGC?

Neither. It was more along the lines of a personal attack.


Ok Doc, I guess I'm not remembering the post that well. I was kinda baked when I read it.

There was a second post that got zapped as well. Again, a personal attack. I don't remember if it was in this thread or not.


He's been tearing it up on the CGC board too
Post 111 • IP   flag post
Collector Nico private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc_1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqeggs
Mike,

It's great to see you make this public statement. There is a lot of useful information in your post.

Here's the thing, though: There's a widespread belief that CBCS consistently grades higher than CGC. A book that receives, say, a CBCS 6.0 will receive a CGC 5.0. A CBCS 9.6 might be a CGC 9.2.

To my mind, the gap between your grading and CGC's grading is the biggest obstacle to the growth of your company. Hardly anybody wants to deal in high-dollar CBCS books because they sell at a fluctuating discount to CGC books with the same grade. Not being able to get a fix on FMV of CBCS books makes me reluctant to buy them or sell them. For lower-dollar books, it doesn't make much difference. But for high-dollar books, it's a killer.

CGC is going through a major crisis because not only do their new slabs have presentation issues with Newton rings, but there is increasing evidence that they are actually damaging the books.

You have a heaven sent opportunity to expand your business.

But to do so I think you need to forthrightly address the grading issue.


I'd like to see examples that you are witnessing where CBCS is overgrading SA or GA books.

I know I have seen inconsistencies from both companies.

A couple of examples where I think CBCS was spot on with CGC.

Pedigree comics submitted a CGC Tales to Astonish 35 9.2. It came back graded a CBCS 9.2. Exact same grade,

The same thing happened with another book from that same collection from Pedigree comics. An Avengers 3 I believe. Same grade.

Where I believe CBCS is more lenient is on REMAINDERED books where the top 1/3 of the cover is off. They are higher than CGC on that.

Also, I recently saw a CGC .5 of a GA TEC that was split down the spine on all pages and cover and not held together....and it got a 1.8. That was shocking to me...I have to say.

But, I recall seeing books from CGC that have been graded 8.0 and they look like a 4.0.

Or a 9.8 that has multiple spine ticks.

Honestly, it's consistency for the most part. But both companies have their challenges on some examples i've seen. But with the majority of books i've seen from both companies they get the job done right.

I would like to know about CBCS stance on where they differ on CGC standards for items such as:

- CGC books that were .5s or NG that are now 1.5 or 1.8s...why or how does that happen?

- heavy extensive resto (like the recent Hulk 1 and SC4 9.8s). Why grade it when CGC won't. Curious.

Those are my main questions i'd like to see answered.


I believe That 0.5 That got an 1.8 has a sig on it, that was unvarified by cgc.
That suurely accounts for some of the bump in grade, 1.8 Seems High though. 1.0-1.5.
But we don't know the full graders notes of both companies.

EDIT: plus I believe That cgc does not account for production errors.
Espc for modern books.

I totally disagree with these exceptions!

Grading changes All the time.

Try scroll back 20 years and see what a datestamps did to the grade and value of a comic.
Or a stylish name on the back.

In the end is Will always be about taste.

How do you like what you see?
Post 112 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc_1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqeggs
Mike,

It's great to see you make this public statement. There is a lot of useful information in your post.

Here's the thing, though: There's a widespread belief that CBCS consistently grades higher than CGC. A book that receives, say, a CBCS 6.0 will receive a CGC 5.0. A CBCS 9.6 might be a CGC 9.2.

To my mind, the gap between your grading and CGC's grading is the biggest obstacle to the growth of your company. Hardly anybody wants to deal in high-dollar CBCS books because they sell at a fluctuating discount to CGC books with the same grade. Not being able to get a fix on FMV of CBCS books makes me reluctant to buy them or sell them. For lower-dollar books, it doesn't make much difference. But for high-dollar books, it's a killer.

CGC is going through a major crisis because not only do their new slabs have presentation issues with Newton rings, but there is increasing evidence that they are actually damaging the books.

You have a heaven sent opportunity to expand your business.

But to do so I think you need to forthrightly address the grading issue.


I'd like to see examples that you are witnessing where CBCS is overgrading SA or GA books.

I know I have seen inconsistencies from both companies.

A couple of examples where I think CBCS was spot on with CGC.

Pedigree comics submitted a CGC Tales to Astonish 35 9.2. It came back graded a CBCS 9.2. Exact same grade,

The same thing happened with another book from that same collection from Pedigree comics. An Avengers 3 I believe. Same grade.

Where I believe CBCS is more lenient is on REMAINDERED books where the top 1/3 of the cover is off. They are higher than CGC on that.

Also, I recently saw a CGC .5 of a GA TEC that was split down the spine on all pages and cover and not held together....and it got a 1.8. That was shocking to me...I have to say.

But, I recall seeing books from CGC that have been graded 8.0 and they look like a 4.0.

Or a 9.8 that has multiple spine ticks.

Honestly, it's consistency for the most part. But both companies have their challenges on some examples i've seen. But with the majority of books i've seen from both companies they get the job done right.

I would like to know about CBCS stance on where they differ on CGC standards for items such as:

- CGC books that were .5s or NG that are now 1.5 or 1.8s...why or how does that happen?

- heavy extensive resto (like the recent Hulk 1 and SC4 9.8s). Why grade it when CGC won't. Curious.

Those are my main questions i'd like to see answered.


I believe That 0.5 That got an 1.8 has a sig on it, that was unvarified by cgc.
That suurely accounts for some of the bump in grade, 1.8 Seems High though. 1.0-1.5.
But we don't know the full graders notes of both companies.


I don't think sigs on books that low grade affect the grade that much.
Post 113 • IP   flag post
Collector nadabig private msg quote post Address this user
I hate myself for thinking I should check out the forums on CGC's site to see if it is similar to here.

Quite honestly, for getting a handle on where to grade comics or what level of service I can expect, the forums seem to be about as helpful as a third nut.
Post 114 • IP   flag post
Collector Nico private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc_1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqeggs
Mike,

It's great to see you make this public statement. There is a lot of useful information in your post.

Here's the thing, though: There's a widespread belief that CBCS consistently grades higher than CGC. A book that receives, say, a CBCS 6.0 will receive a CGC 5.0. A CBCS 9.6 might be a CGC 9.2.

To my mind, the gap between your grading and CGC's grading is the biggest obstacle to the growth of your company. Hardly anybody wants to deal in high-dollar CBCS books because they sell at a fluctuating discount to CGC books with the same grade. Not being able to get a fix on FMV of CBCS books makes me reluctant to buy them or sell them. For lower-dollar books, it doesn't make much difference. But for high-dollar books, it's a killer.

CGC is going through a major crisis because not only do their new slabs have presentation issues with Newton rings, but there is increasing evidence that they are actually damaging the books.

You have a heaven sent opportunity to expand your business.

But to do so I think you need to forthrightly address the grading issue.


I'd like to see examples that you are witnessing where CBCS is overgrading SA or GA books.

I know I have seen inconsistencies from both companies.

A couple of examples where I think CBCS was spot on with CGC.

Pedigree comics submitted a CGC Tales to Astonish 35 9.2. It came back graded a CBCS 9.2. Exact same grade,

The same thing happened with another book from that same collection from Pedigree comics. An Avengers 3 I believe. Same grade.

Where I believe CBCS is more lenient is on REMAINDERED books where the top 1/3 of the cover is off. They are higher than CGC on that.

Also, I recently saw a CGC .5 of a GA TEC that was split down the spine on all pages and cover and not held together....and it got a 1.8. That was shocking to me...I have to say.

But, I recall seeing books from CGC that have been graded 8.0 and they look like a 4.0.

Or a 9.8 that has multiple spine ticks.

Honestly, it's consistency for the most part. But both companies have their challenges on some examples i've seen. But with the majority of books i've seen from both companies they get the job done right.

I would like to know about CBCS stance on where they differ on CGC standards for items such as:

- CGC books that were .5s or NG that are now 1.5 or 1.8s...why or how does that happen?

- heavy extensive resto (like the recent Hulk 1 and SC4 9.8s). Why grade it when CGC won't. Curious.

Those are my main questions i'd like to see answered.


I believe That 0.5 That got an 1.8 has a sig on it, that was unvarified by cgc.
That suurely accounts for some of the bump in grade, 1.8 Seems High though. 1.0-1.5.
But we don't know the full graders notes of both companies.


I don't think sigs on books that low grade affect the grade that much.


I said "some" of it...
And That we don't have the notes from both companies to compare.

I agree That the unvarified sig alone should not take it from 0.5 to 1.8.


I cant remember the age of the book and how Old the cgc grading was.

But we are getting to a point where you can have a graded book, that was "modern" when it was graded, but now is a bronze age.

So the agefactor could add to a grade jump aswell.

I believe both cgc and cbcs Are more lenient the older the comic gets.
Post 115 • IP   flag post
Collector The_Curmudgeon private msg quote post Address this user
Age should never be a factor in determining a comic's grade.
Post 116 • IP   flag post
Collector VintageComics private msg quote post Address this user
It's been that way since Overstreet starting publishing grading standards. GA books were allowed larger defects than SA books in the same grade, etc.
Post 117 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stelbert_Stylton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc_1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqeggs
Mike,

It's great to see you make this public statement. There is a lot of useful information in your post.

Here's the thing, though: There's a widespread belief that CBCS consistently grades higher than CGC. A book that receives, say, a CBCS 6.0 will receive a CGC 5.0. A CBCS 9.6 might be a CGC 9.2.

To my mind, the gap between your grading and CGC's grading is the biggest obstacle to the growth of your company. Hardly anybody wants to deal in high-dollar CBCS books because they sell at a fluctuating discount to CGC books with the same grade. Not being able to get a fix on FMV of CBCS books makes me reluctant to buy them or sell them. For lower-dollar books, it doesn't make much difference. But for high-dollar books, it's a killer.

CGC is going through a major crisis because not only do their new slabs have presentation issues with Newton rings, but there is increasing evidence that they are actually damaging the books.

You have a heaven sent opportunity to expand your business.

But to do so I think you need to forthrightly address the grading issue.


I'd like to see examples that you are witnessing where CBCS is overgrading SA or GA books.

I know I have seen inconsistencies from both companies.

A couple of examples where I think CBCS was spot on with CGC.

Pedigree comics submitted a CGC Tales to Astonish 35 9.2. It came back graded a CBCS 9.2. Exact same grade,

The same thing happened with another book from that same collection from Pedigree comics. An Avengers 3 I believe. Same grade.

Where I believe CBCS is more lenient is on REMAINDERED books where the top 1/3 of the cover is off. They are higher than CGC on that.

Also, I recently saw a CGC .5 of a GA TEC that was split down the spine on all pages and cover and not held together....and it got a 1.8. That was shocking to me...I have to say.

But, I recall seeing books from CGC that have been graded 8.0 and they look like a 4.0.

Or a 9.8 that has multiple spine ticks.

Honestly, it's consistency for the most part. But both companies have their challenges on some examples i've seen. But with the majority of books i've seen from both companies they get the job done right.

I would like to know about CBCS stance on where they differ on CGC standards for items such as:

- CGC books that were .5s or NG that are now 1.5 or 1.8s...why or how does that happen?

- heavy extensive resto (like the recent Hulk 1 and SC4 9.8s). Why grade it when CGC won't. Curious.

Those are my main questions i'd like to see answered.


I believe That 0.5 That got an 1.8 has a sig on it, that was unvarified by cgc.
That suurely accounts for some of the bump in grade, 1.8 Seems High though. 1.0-1.5.
But we don't know the full graders notes of both companies.


I don't think sigs on books that low grade affect the grade that much.


I said "some" of it...
And That we don't have the notes from both companies to compare.

I agree That the unvarified sig alone should not take it from 0.5 to 1.8.


Yup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
I cant remember the age of the book and how Old the cgc grading was. But we are getting to a point where you can have a graded book, that was "modern" when it was graded, but now is a bronze age. So the age factor could add to a grade jump as well.


That's not the way the comic ages work. A Modern book can never become Bronze.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico
I believe both cgc and cbcs Are more lenient the older the comic gets.


Yup. Borock said so when he was CGC's president.
Post 118 • IP   flag post
Collector Stelbert_Stylton private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
It's been that way since Overstreet starting publishing grading standards. GA books were allowed larger defects than SA books in the same grade, etc.


Overstreet also said pressing was restoration, but that was changed.
Post 119 • IP   flag post
Collector The_Curmudgeon private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
It's been that way since Overstreet starting publishing grading standards. GA books were allowed larger defects than SA books in the same grade, etc.


When did they start saying that?
I haven't looked at an Overstreet in over 20 years, not since the pricing guide became irrelevant.
Post 120 • IP   flag post
Collector comeaux private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
@comeaux

My man, I saw your post last night but didn't respond to it as I was pretty tired and wanted to think about my reply. It looks like the post was scrubbed.

I'm the dealer that has stated more than once that I've seen 1000's of CBCS books, and that I thought their early books were graded loosely and I still stand by my previous statement based on the high grade SA and BA that I saw at that time.

Bob Storms has also stated it on this forum last week and if you know Bob, he shoots straight as an arrow. We actually discussed it in detail two weeks ago in Orlando as we looked over many books together. I've also heard it from other reputable dealers.

I have friends at both companies but friendship and business are always difficult to separate.

I've been an exclusively CGC dealer because I have familiarity with the company (I've been submitting since 2003) and I believe in the product. But in running a business I have to use the service that I feel is going to make my business the most money.

You might find it amusing to learn that when I joined the CGC chat forum back in 2004 that I also stood up for PGX until I learned more about them. Everyone labeled me a PGX apologist back then too. lol

Since the higher end high grade CBCS SA and BA books I followed in auctions in 2014 - 2015 did not do as well as CGC books over all, I made a decision to stick with CGC early on. That being said, if i feel CBCS's grading has tightened up and I couple that with my concerns about the new CGC case, I may try them out. I've just been too busy lately to do some of my own research.

I don't follow auction results very closely anymore except for bigger books but I did hear about an Amazing Fantasy #15 CBCS 9.0 fetching over $230K in a recent Comic Connect auction. That's a monster result and speaks to how CBCS is being currently perceived and accepted in the higher end.


Well to be honest Roy, nothing in my post was directed at you at all. In fact since I’ve paid more attention to your posts at CGC forum, I’ve gained a lot of respect for you.

I do have a problem with people continuously stating that CBCS is loose when in fact there have been assertions from reputable members who claim just the opposite as they crack out their books and have found CGC to be VERY inconsistent while CBCS is more consistent.

On the CGC boards, anytime there is any criticism of a CGC mistake, the CGC bagpipe orchestra demands a video or photo proof or it didn’t happen in their opinion. I have yet to see one example of a CBCS over graded book but yet the same person at CGC forum continues to state this unfounded claim of CBCS over grading. There is clearly an agenda and I’m not the only one who recognizes it.

As far as Bob Storms, I know the guy is highly experienced and reputable. I bought my first graded books from Bob and also at my first comic con, my wife and I purchased several graded books from him there as well. Regardless of all of this, I’m going to discount what Bob says about CBCS as clearly it’s a biased opinion as all he sells is CGC books, just as you and a few others. As I have stated, I have much respect for you and Bob as well but as far as the other CGCbots, in my opinion they are a bunch or drones.

Anyone who deals exclusively with CGC, I am going to take their opinions about CBCS with a grain of salt and not put much believe in their CBCS opinions as I feel there is an agenda, others do as well. Although I have a few CBCS slabs, I have 100’s of CGC slabs and even more NGC coins. Because of all the shenanigans with the Certified Collectibles Group, I will eventually purge all of these items.

I saw one of the CGCbots make the comment about me selling books on the CGC forum since I had made negative CGC comments, well of course I sell there as I bought 80% of the books there and the others I paid CGC to grade them for me with my CGC membership.

What I find quite odd is that folks on the CGC forum can bash CBCS all they want to and I’ve never seen anyone defend the comments. Then when there was some CGC bashing going on here, Bob shows up and makes a comments to the effect of “wow, there sure is a lot of CGC bashing going on here” which I personally found was quit odd. I didn’t see him or anyone else defend the negative comments about CBCS on the CGC forum. I see members continue to use the stupid name “Voldermort” which is just more negative digs at CBCS, it seems that CGC has actually matured just a little bit and allow the use of the CBCS name so the continuous use of “Voldermort” is disrespectful. That’s why I have no problem calling the new CGC slab TurdSlab because it's actually the worst slab ever introduced into the market. I will never buy one of these cellophane wrapped CGC crapslabs.

Then you have other CGCbots who do nothing but denigrate CBCS at the CGC forum and state they will never use CBCS but yet they show up here, make a few comments and then run back to the CGC board to give a heads up of what’s being said. It’s quite childish but since the CGC management has handled CBCS discussions on their board very childish, I wouldn’t expect much more from their CGCbots.

Yea so my post got removed here and maybe it was harsh but the people I referred to constantly make stupid, passive aggressive comments on the CGC boards but it’s permitted because they’re in the “Cool Books” crowd, suckup to CGC and the board glitterati, although it’s quite comical, it’s also desparate and pathetic. I feel the post should not have been removed but it’s whatever. My other post that got removed attacked nobody at all so I’m puzzled at why it was removed.

Everything I said was directed specifically at the same few CGC trolls who continuously bait and troll people and CBCS so I don’t have a problem at all with what I said. For the most part, the majority of CGC members are really cool and I have no issues with them at all. There are only two or three CGCbots that need to grow up and get out of the sandbox.

In any case, like I said bro I 100% meant nothing at all towards you at all so hopefully you did not feel I did.

Thanks
comeaux
Post 121 • IP   flag post
Collector nadabig private msg quote post Address this user
Was anyone else getting PMs from the trolls?
Post 122 • IP   flag post
Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by nadabig
Was anyone else getting PMs from the trolls?

If some sent you a harassing PM, then click "Report" in the lower right hand corner of the offending PM and the moderators will address the situation.
Post 123 • IP   flag post
Moderator The_Watcher private msg quote post Address this user
@nadabig If you received any unwarranted PMs, feel free to use the "Report" option at the bottom of the PM to alert moderation
Post 124 • IP   flag post
Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
Wow, a thread with an echo.
Post 125 • IP   flag post
Collector nadabig private msg quote post Address this user
They were childish at best. I have to say this spat thing whatever it is, it's doing nothing for anyone.
Post 126 • IP   flag post
Collector VintageComics private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by comeaux

Well to be honest Roy, nothing in my post was directed at you at all. In fact since I’ve paid more attention to your posts at CGC forum, I’ve gained a lot of respect for you.


Thanks!

I didn't take any offense at what you posted or notify the mods. I think it was removed because of the nature of some of the words and slang you used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by comeaux

I do have a problem with people continuously stating that CBCS is loose when in fact there have been assertions from reputable members who claim just the opposite as they crack out their books and have found CGC to be VERY inconsistent while CBCS is more consistent.


I'd be curious to know who those reputable members are. I'm considered a pretty solid grader and I see a lot of books every year.

I agree that CGC is inconsistent. I have books that I have resubmitted that have recently gone down in grade.
Post 127 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by PovRow
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown

"Team derail" was a commonly used term about a decade ago when pressing became the new hot button.


OK - last word to you on these boards. I said pressing, alcohol and sports were used to derail. You, just like on the CGC boards, pick and choose, ignore the rest and spin new arguments as if your "opponent" had said them.


That's one perspective, certainly.

Here's another: I make reasonable, rational arguments to which you have no response, and hide behind that by stating that I "pick and choose, ignore the rest" (no matter how relevant OR NOT the "picked and chosen" statements actually are...relevance isn't relevant to you), and that I "spin new arguments" despite your inability to clearly, rationally, dispassionately demonstrate that, using actual evidence, in any way.

Easy to accuse...not so easy to prove. And that's what you've done for years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PovRow
So from this point on regardless of what you say to me you will not get a response. here.


If what I say offends you so deeply, and it clearly does, it's a very good thing for you to not respond to anything I say. Let's hope you can stick to it...?

No need for spoiler tags when you're not a target of moderation.
Post 128 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown

But, no concrete examples of your "pressing as thread derailing theory", then?



"Team derail" was a commonly used term about a decade ago when pressing became the new hot button.

Some who were 'pro pressing' would regularly chime into pressing threads and 'derail' them using humor and other distractions and would take away from the actual discussion at the time.

It was well known and visible to anyone there at the time.

What Pov says has value. People with vested interests will weigh in on threads that contradict those interests and attempt to either stop them or curtail them.

And now that we've all derailed this thread.....


Ok, but that was over a decade ago, and that hasn't happened much since, because the pressing issue is relatively settled. Bringing up events that happened a decade ago, as if they're still a problem...is that realistic? Obviously, since I like to wander in conversations, I'm relatively sensitive to people complaining...and, thus, threatening my continued presence...just for being "off-topic." Really, if that's the worst offense someone makes, that's hardly worth getting upset about.

Yes, people try to derail. No doubt. But there's an easy solution to people trying to derail: you, the individual, just stay on-topic and don't get involved in the side chatter. Trying to get others to conform to what I think is or is not the "right way" to post is a surefire way of developing conflict.

And yes, there IS a difference between just being "off-topic", and purposely trying to divert a topic, but again, it's easily resolved by simply staying on-topic. Complaining about others being off-topic...as we are doing here...is just as effective at derailing a thread as the other derailers.

And, of course, there's the whole issue of perspective. What may appear to you to be one thing may not, in fact, be that thing at all.


Without wanting to derail this thread again,

The decade ago example was just one example.
It happens on various topics.
It still happens.


Sure, but the degree of derailing is markedly less now than it was. Do you not agree?

Also...are you willing to admit that what we see and perceive isn't necessarily what is...?

I am. Happens all the time, despite a concerted effort not to. And, if those making a concerted effort to avoid personal perspective misjudgments make them, how more easily those who make little to no effort...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageComics

Human nature doesn't change, just the situation.

Pov is a pretty perceptive dude with a wide range of perspective from what I know about him after posting 80,000 posts over 12+ years on the CGC chat forum.


Pov, just like you or me, needs no one to defend him. He's well capable...as you know...of stating his perspective, regardless of the legitimacy of that perspective.

Pov IS a pretty perceptive dude...but that certainly doesn't make him immune to bad judgments, bad arguments, and bad decisions, especially when those are based on emotional responses.
Post 129 • IP   flag post
Collector PovRow private msg quote post Address this user
Just relinking Michael's post. It is certainly worth re-re-reading!

http://forum.cbcscomics.com/topic/399/page/1/a-moment-of-clarity/
Post 130 • IP   flag post
138981 184 30
Log in or sign up to compose a reply.
destitute