CGC VS CBCS12155
 I've spent years perfecting my brand of assholery.
|
DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I'm not a fan of the CBCS label. Someone hit the nail on the head when they said it looked like construction paper. | ||
| Post 51 • IP flag post | ||
 PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
| A lot of "yikes" in here... Any graded 9.8 may look like a 9.6 to another. That's the subjective nature of grading for ya. Buy the book, not the label, for any/all comics - not just PGX. Neither CGC nor CBCS are the authority on comic grading. |
||
| Post 52 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| They are both actually "authorities" on grading. | ||
| Post 53 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
VisceralDreams private msg quote post Address this user | |
| No Newton rings Free grader’s notes via QR CODE No need to reslab More accurate grading This forum No movement of the book in slab Pricing Slimmer less bulky case If cbcs pressing tats were better,they were grading bigger sized books ,and they had some character labels it’d be no contest lol |
||
| Post 54 • IP flag post | ||
 Leftover Sundae Gnus
|
CatmanAmerica private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Census and Registry provide important internal data for maintaining provenance of books, but are more like window dressing when it comes to market sales criteria. Auctions and private sales of specific books provide the only usable data for determining market trends. Census data is notoriously inaccurate and serial numbers only matter when labels are resubmitted with books if they're reholdered. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Far from it. I could go back to their response to my email from June 13, 2016 to provide evidence. Here is their response (in quotes, names left off): "...we don't have any plans at this stage to include sales from other certification services. As we have done in the past, we concentrate on collecting, collating and analysing CGC comics specifically. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require further assistance. Regards..." Ask yourself, why would GPA in their own words just concentrate on CGC specifically unless there was some kind of business relationship? You're right that reporting sales isn't shilling per se, but the definition of what constitutes shilling is vague as well, dependent upon whether the term is being employed an intransitive verb or a noun. Arguably reporting selected sales to the benefit of one company over another when there's any financial involvement could be considered shilling by proxy. Note: This includes any advertising involvement, editorial opinion pieces, etc. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town There is no "if", GPA has some serious blind spots and the flaws are apparently by intent. See my included quote from the four year old email above. I didn't delete it because I knew this would be an ongoing issue with the data service. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town I think people have a right to inform their opinions based on facts. For instance, if one's girlfriend gets pregnant that's a verifiable fact. How she got that way begs other questions. So, given the hypothetical that one company has the appearance of being in bed with another, what should we believe about a company knowingly providing incomplete data? Seriously, flawed data can be measured and reconsidered on it's merits, omitted data cannot. Making a concerted effort to avoid including data based on a business model is misleading and an egregious abuse of the public's right to full disclosure of market information. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town I've found work arounds for a lot of the GoCollect data I need, but there were none for the intentionally omitted data from GPA. Of course that was four years ago. I quit using them due to their direct connection to CGC and thinly veiled bias. Through GoCollect it takes a couple of extra clicks to get most of ComicLink's older public auction sales data which Josh apparently considers proprietary (blocking access to auction bidding data should be a violation of law, but that's a whole 'nother debate). |
||
| Post 55 • IP flag post | ||
 Have I told you about the time I dropped off 3,000 comics at SDCC?
|
Scifinator private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by VisceralDreams I second all but that the character labels. |
||
| Post 56 • IP flag post | ||
 Not trying to be an ass since February 12, 2020.
|
HulkSmash private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @CatmanAmerica GPA describes themselves an “analysis tool for CGC graded comics and magazines” I see no hiding the fact that their business is to specifically provide info on CGC sales. Use them or don’t. It not like CGC gets a cut when a book they graded is sold. | ||
| Post 57 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| "Census and Registry provide important internal data for maintaining provenance of books, but are more like window dressing when it comes to market sales criteria. Auctions and private sales of specific books provide the only usable data for determining market trends. Census data is notoriously inaccurate and serial numbers only matter when labels are resubmitted with books if they're reholdered." I couldnt disagree more in this comment, and this is why. When I buy an expensive slabbed book, i like being able to look at the census and registry and determine how many there are in given grade, or grade range. There is for instance a book or two in the Thor run between 152 and 160 where roughly half the copies graded are over 9.2 in the census. Rather than drop big money for when its nice being able to check and verify that there are a considerable number and it isn't scarce. Likewise a book like new mutants 93, or x men 266 ..the list is endless and the need to check and see where and how the grading falls for that body of books is DIRECTLY ESSENTIAL to helping determine price potential from me at least. So what if the count might be off even ten or twenty copies, you can still spot trends easily. Arguing that has no value is appalling. As for serial numbers, and a registry how many times do we see people bringing books into the forum that the slab appears switched...it happens at least every few weeks. Being able to check the serial number vs the grader notes etc is again essential and suggesting otherwise is again APALLING. For those reasons , no I would not have allowed a company that does grading but lacks a census or registry, no matter the few mistakes it might contain, to report their sales if I were GPA. Far from it. I could go back to their response to my email from June 13, 2016 to provide evidence. Here is their response (in quotes, names left off): "...we don't have any plans at this stage to include sales from other certification services. As we have done in the past, we concentrate on collecting, collating and analysing CGC comics specifically. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require further assistance. Regards..." Ask yourself, why would GPA in their own words just concentrate on CGC specifically unless there was some kind of business relationship? You're right that reporting sales isn't shilling per se, but the definition of what constitutes shilling is vague as well, dependent upon whether the term is being employed an intransitive verb or a noun. Arguably reporting selected sales to the benefit of one company over another when there's any financial involvement could be considered shilling by proxy. Note: This includes any advertising involvement, editorial opinion pieces, etc. Reading what you posted..no we don't plan to include other services AT THIS STAGE......which makes perfect sense as I explained. As they have done in the past they focus on yada yada...because and rightfully so, no other service was offering transparency and a method of validating the graded slabs. Again perfect sense....at that time Why would they focus on only CGC? Why precisely as I explained...you may argue their decision constitutes shilling but essentially when you sign up and purchase the service they make it quite clear they are a business that tracks and reports market trends based on CGC sales. They are not omitting anything, they are a dedicated reporting service and never gave you any cause to demand otherwise....there are countless businesses out there that make their living by in some way handling some aspect of another companies sole waste products, or in some manner working exclusively through one company and if you consider them all flawed and shilling that's a highly inaccurate understanding of business models.Its apparent you consider it an "ongoing issue" and are dwelling on what was a solid choice four years ago. Now that CBCS can offer those services sure, lets see where they go now with it...they by all rights should include that now. I think people have a right to inform their opinions based on facts. For instance, if one's girlfriend gets pregnant that's a verifiable fact. How she got that way begs other questions. So, given the hypothetical that one company has the appearance of being in bed with another, what should we believe about a company knowingly providing incomplete data? Seriously, flawed data can be measured and reconsidered on it's merits, omitted data cannot. Making a concerted effort to avoid including data based on a business model is misleading and an egregious abuse of the public's right to full disclosure of market information. Certainly people should make their decisions based on facts...so lets do that instead. Given the hypothetical of a company knowingly providing incomplete data....hmmm so what about only reporting perhaps four of the sales venues, mostly basing the data on only EBAY...or for that matter knowingly and deliberately failing to report information about SIGNED BOOKS....that's incomplete data...so if you beat one service up for it, use a balanced stick to measure. The very omissions that Gocollect makes are the ones i consider critical myself There are more ways to provide incomplete data knowingly than just omitting CBCS listings, which appears to be your pet argument here. IN a fair and balanced world you would apply that evenly I couldn't agree with you more, providing incomplete data is an egregious abuse of public trust...so why are you adamantly defending it? If you spend half your time building work around for go-collect data but then complain about someone else profiting from providing incomplete data that's a pretty obvious and clear case of forest for the trees. You keep accusing GPA of some dire dark direct connection, that appears to link to wounded feelings about them rejecting your request four years ago. I would have rejected it as well as I explained quite reasonably. I haven't been shown or seen any direct evidence that they are somehow in bed, shilling or doing anything else ominous. I at least can get behind your ideas about auctions information not being proprietary etc.I think the people engaging in that practice do the entire hobby a disservice. I enjoy your golden age books and the thread, where you demonstrate them so perfectly but I sometimes wonder reading all of this, if perhaps we work at opposite ends of a spectrum where you are primarly dealing with high grade golden age books and I tend to deal mostly in middle grade level silver books. Anyways hope the day finds you well and sorry for apparently being argumentative. Mad respect for your collection and books regardless our disagreement |
||
| Post 58 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by HulkSmashThis....thanks for adding that |
||
| Post 59 • IP flag post | ||
|
Leftover Sundae Gnus
|
CatmanAmerica private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by HulkSmash Describing GPA as a CGC tool seems accurate enough. At the time of our correspondence they were less open about it. |
||
| Post 60 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| for that matter visiting the GPA page, they have a list of links and adds for their Partner/sponsors and one of them is in fact listed as CGC....so they publicly admit and claim they are sponsored by and partner with CGC. that seems pretty clear and open for me...although to be fair I wasn't looking at it in particular four years ago. |
||
| Post 61 • IP flag post | ||
|
Leftover Sundae Gnus
|
CatmanAmerica private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town You are certainly entitled to disagree, but my opinion on this is well informed. Trust me on this, Census data which is based on the honor system is inaccurate. You can read lawyerly caveats on the CGC site which bear this out. The degree of inaccuracy is the only debatable point. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Four years have passed. That stage coach left the station a long time ago. If there were ever going to be efforts made toward more data inclusiveness wouldn’t GPA’s policy toward auctioned CBCS books have changed by now? Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town That policy was not clear early on in GPA’s promotion as a data service. Besides, this kind of specialization is anathema to providing one stop, full disclosure of available information. It’s like placing subjective grading stickers on slabs. Where’s the need for a parasitic grade sticker? Consumers end up paying more for the doling out information. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town I beg to differ here. Alas, we may just have to agree to disagree on this issue. When I initially subscribed to GPA there was no clear indication that they were a tool or whatever for CGC. That is why I pursued the initial query. Any excuse of Census and Registry data as an explanation for GPA’s failure to collect CBCS sales data is a Hitchcock worthy MacGuffin. I’d love to be proven wrong on this, but GPA has no intention of covering CBCS sales and auctions. You seem okay with the idea that increased specialization in market analysis, but we’re not talking about Fords verses Ferraris here. Market sales aren’t proprietary or at least they shouldn’t be under the law. Slab discrimination needs to end. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town I have limited experience with signed books, but personally feel that this is the one grey area of the hobby that might justify separation from traditionally graded books, not that analytical services shouldn’t make an effort to cover autograph sales data whenever possible. This is strictly my opinion. Signatures have value based on a variety of criteria having less to do with the scarcity of books than the availability and verification of living and deceased creator autographs. The market volatility around this area of the hobby is distinct and separate from traditional collecting due to factors having nothing to do with grade. I’m not being judgmental here, but it’s a different hobby altogether. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town This type of reverse argument is tiresome because it dodges the context of my original point. Let me put this as simply as possible, incomplete data by design isn’t the same as missed data by mistake. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Where did I say that I spend half my time building work around? There are exaggerations which may be food for thought and then there are nothing burgers. This falls into the latter cuisine. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Whoa, ease up on the reins a bit before this stallion gets away from you. I’ve avoided any inference of dire darkness to any perceived/obvious connection between CGC and GPA. Any wound produced by the suggestion of complicity isn't on my part. Provide defensive cover on behalf of GPA if you must, but I have no desire to enter into a contentious debate on this issue. This isn’t personal for me; GPA isn’t worth a disagreement of perspective turning into a pissing contest. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town So, who’ll be the final arbiter of what constitutes incontrovertible evidence? You do have a point that if the evidence isn’t hidden describing it as ominous would a stretch. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town You see, I knew we’d find common ground on something!  Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Thanks, that’s much appreciated and indeed our collecting ambitions probably differ, but in respect to analytical services there shouldn’t be distinctions between our respective interests. Quote: Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Thanks again, my friend. Be safe, follow the CDC ...not the CGC... guidelines & stay healthy.  |
||
| Post 62 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| You seem to be summoning some dark, ghost in the machine highly secretive information to discredit the census, by stating trust you, you are well informed. I agree the census is likely as you use the term...imperfect...but then again so is gocollect and you defend it in the same breathe. The degree of inaccuracy is always going to be somewhat open to discussion but the point is , it is still adequate to spot trends and determine how many of a given book are higher grade vs lower grade. It feels like you are implying CGC only registers or reveals what books it chooses in what grades it chooses which would accomplish what deep Machivellian purpose? Simply reporting the grades and number of books. If that census tells me ten thousand copies of New mutants grade above 9.6 then I can get a pretty good concept that paying premium prices for a book that common in high grade is pointless. If that figure they are reporting is ten comics or a hundred comics out of whack how does that alter the basic trend the information is demonstrating? It doesn't, and that is the value in a census. Arguing that people break and resubmit books is a red herring...if they broke and resubmitted ten copies of Hulk 1 its probably a similar degree of resubmission with Daredevil 1 or JIM 83..it is imperfect..but then that's the acceptable standard for gocollect you have applied . Again and no, regarding your four years comment....cbcs has only NOW offered a census and registry. You don't seem to be grasping that without that tool it would be pointless to report their sales prior to that event. Four years has zero bearing...now that they have taken the step to make their census and registry verifiable and transparent it makes sense. Projecting your thoughts that a business must by your thinking include full one stop disclosure of information is faulty logic. Again they clearly state what they offer, who they are and what it is....demanding a caterpillar grow ten more legs to suit your idea of asthetics doesn't alter the basic evolution of the species. They don't choose to and haven't to this point for which I myself am glad...(see comments regarding census and registry) If they do now alter their methods that might be an interesting and wise choice, I agree, but until now, no it would havge been a flawed choice I think if you feel that passionate at this theme, it might be a valid choice and decision to form your own analysis company and offer only reporting for CBCS slabs, all things being equal. But end of the day you can bet you would defend your right to operate that business as you felt it best serves rather than how others might demand you do so. You are trying to argue signed books are now...a separate hobby? Fair enough..perhaps golden agee comics should be a separate hobby and silver age, and people that collect newsstands, or foreign editions...lets just eliminate anyone that does it differently than I do...that would certainly make a valid excuse for then omitting that data from the service. We shove those damn variant collectors out of our hobby altogether.....and the collectors that collect treasuries and even the digest sized comics can go too...we can remove everyone that gocollect failed to provide data for and that should fix it.Anything that works at different dynamics and has values affected by anything but grade can just be removed... Gocollect isn't missing data by accident, they simply have failed to get agreement to include data from anywhere except Ebay. They manually mine the information they supply from Hakes, HA, CConnect and comiclink, and mechanically harvest ebay sales. This means the differing methods themselves create issues...mechanical failures to remove sales that were later determined as shill sales etc, or feedback driving events that were not actual sales etc...wheres using the human method, there is always a certain degree of error by input....but the bottom line is that they have no reporting for a massive section of the market and have simply failed to get it done by negotiation, discussion or effort...failure to INCLUDE DATA, meaning MISSING DATA. I dodged nothing, that was precisely my point. You hold GPA massively responsible because they do not provide sales for CBCS slabs but then give gocollect free reign and endorsement for reporting what amounts to a tenth of the market at best and using those figures as stand alones to somehow determine they cover more sales and auctions (your own words) despite the fact they simply do not....because they cannot report sales from places like MCS and multiple other avenues that GPA did the legwork and negotiating to get the right to report. I agree the data shouldn't be kept out of anyones reach but that's the system that exists now...until its fixed. Given that, it then is mercurial to use the service that most cross reports the given market rather than their own select portion they were ABLE TO ACCESS.....if you argue that GPA is missing lots of data then try to somehow argue that gocollect includes more simply because they report all companies slab sales, you aren't really understanding what gocollect is and is not reporting. You made this statement above...."I've found work arounds for a lot of the GoCollect data I need." This implies you were not able to find work arounds for the rest of the data you need....meaning at least some amount of time was spent both finding working, and also non working solutions for each issue, whether it falls into the resolved or unresolved category. Sounds like a lot of time to me, so if I exaggerated please forgive me but it does appear you are quite readily condemning GPA for choosing to be soley inclusive while defending and supporting another service that is why yes...unable or lacking needed data.....missing needed information. Above you stated that signed books are driven by a whole separate set of factors aside from grade...ie desireability of the particular signer, his status among collectors, living or dead, where or perhaps when it was signed, etc.You took that as license to suggest it should be a separate hobby removed from ours based on differing factors aside from grade. You then blanket argue that...in your words...."indeed our collecting ambitions probably differ, but in respect to analytical services there shouldn’t be distinctions between our respective interests." No distinctions, except for the signed books apparently? You collect high end golden age books for which a census is both unlikely to contain a high number and where a given quantity being off even two copies might profoundly impact the data....it makes a less than perfectly accurate census discardable for you I collect multiple mid grade copies of various silver age titles for various reasons...but I can spot trends what is common based on sometimes as many as three -four thousand copies in the census, making a small error within census data while "imperfect" quite useful..... You , from the books you have posted appear to key and lock In on books that might be the sole highest copy or one an existing handful in that grade for that book..it is amazing. It is also entirely a different method of collecting than mine, wherein I am shopping multiple copies of my FF 25 in mid grades, that are easily obtainable. I believe there are enough distinctions that make your pursuit different than mine..if we are to remove signed books, to also remove golden age high grade collectors...so then what? See the distinction emerging? You can argue gocollect is a better service if you like and suggest GPA is failing expectations because they refuse to include other companies slabs but at the end of the day..GPA is including more sales data, across a broader spectrum to the standard collector as demonstrated above. Their data is "imperfect" inso asmuch as is gocollect...as far as raw data...so then you must examine the level of coverage....a service that covers four venues or one that covers 40...yes 40 venues. This quote from their homepage …."By tracking, recording, and averaging over 40 online venues, GPA does the work for you, saving you time and money." The single issue you have evidenced is they do not and ignored your request to include CBCS slabs four years ago and that they appear to be a "tool" for reporting CGC sales. Science magazines and journals serve as "tools" for reporting science findings...so by this logic we would also question their integrity. Weather channels serve as "tools" for reporting meteorologists reports and information...non clandestine as well. The list goes for a good length...many companies serve as " tools" for reporting information from selected venues as well. I don't think you have made a great case that Gocollect with their four sales venue reporting methods is hands down and twice on sundays a better service than GPA who reports from 40 venues. Sure your mileage may vary but end of the day I prefer to use a service with more sales data reported across a larger spectrum of the market, and inclusive of all areas of the hobby regarding slabs sales...signed, variants, etc. I myself feel the census is valid for a qualifier to bring CBCS into contention and be considered for inclusion now, for the reasons I have offered...I can look to the future and at least hope that also sinks in for GPA..now their clock is running. On the other hand I doubt you will see the market alter its standing for sales data, with most business contending it is proprietary and refusing gocollect similar access. Sadly many of those auction houses seem to only want the highest sales reported, and to limit who gets to report them. |
||
| Post 63 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town They're not. They're groups of professionals. |
||
| Post 64 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Of course incorrect, as born out by most standard dictionaries, make note of the definition.....used throughout...a person with a high degree of knowledge, ie restoration spotting, grading, cleaning pressing, and even pedigree knowledge, as well as skill...cleaning, pressing, grading, slabbing etc. The people who operate both CGC and CBCS by literal definition are in fact comic book authorities, thanks AUTHORITY the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience. "he had absolute authority over his subordinates" · [more] synonyms: power · jurisdiction · command · control · mastery · charge · dominance · [more] the right to act in a specified way, delegated from one person or organization to another. "military forces have the legal authority to arrest drug traffickers" synonyms: authorization · right · power · mandate · prerogative · license · carte blanche · droit official permission; sanction. "the money was spent without congressional authority" synonyms: authorization · permission · consent · leave · sanction · license · [more] (authorities) a person or organization having power or control in a particular, typically political or administrative, sphere. "the health authorities" · [more] synonyms: officials · officialdom · the people in charge · the government · [more] the power to influence others, especially because of one's commanding manner or one's recognized knowledge about something. "he has the natural authority of one who is used to being obeyed" · [more] synonyms: power · jurisdiction · command · control · mastery · charge · dominance · [more] Legal Definition of authority. 1 : an official decision of a court used especially as a precedent. 2 a : a power to act especially over others that derives from status, position, or office the authority of the president also : jurisdiction. Authority | Definition of Authority at Dictionary.com https://www.dictionary.com/browse/authority 1. Authority, control, influence denote a power or right to direct the actions or thoughts of others. Authority is a power or right, usually because of rank or office, to issue commands and to punish for violations: to have authority over subordinates. Authority - definition of authority by The Free Dictionary https://www.thefreedictionary.com/authority The right and power to command, decide, rule, or judge: command, control, domination, dominion, … A person or group having the right and power to command, decide, rule, or judge: official. Idioms: … Conferred power: faculty, mandate, right. Law: competence, competency. A person with a high degree of knowledge or skill... Authority definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/authority authority in British English the power or right to control, judge, or prohibit the actions of ot the power derived from opinion, respect, or esteem; influence... authority | Origin and meaning of authority by Online ... h Definitions of authorityfrom WordNet. authority(n. the power or right to give orders or make decisions; he has the authorityto issue warrants. Synonyms: authorization/ authorisation/ potency/ dominance/ say-so. authority(n. (usually plural) persons who exercise (administrative) control over others; authority… 1 a person with a high level of knowledge or skill in a field. the leading authority on neural anatomy. |
||
| Post 65 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
| None of CGC, CBCS, PGX, or Overstreet are "authorities". There is no appealing to authority when you buy a raw comic book (because there's no authority). Buy the book - not the label. Grading is a subjective skill. It's not a science. None of those definition apply to comic book grading. You're wrong. You just like to be a contrarian and try to argue nonsense. |
||
| Post 66 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| the definition of authority is not intrinsic to the ability to appeal to it...see above. the definition of the word clearly states that an authority can be a person with great knowledge or skill of a given area...regardless of ability to appeal. Insulting people wont salvage this for you, the definitions clearly denote an authority can also be a person with great knowledge or skill in a given area. Move along now.... |
||
| Post 67 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town A field. Like science. Not something that has no universal objective nature like comic book grading. Context matters. There is no authority in comic book grading. |
||
| Post 68 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Sorry but you are altering the definition to fit your argument...it in fact does not state science nor require it be either a field nor does it define that it must be objective ….context does matter. the context of the definition does not allow for your alterations.... | ||
| Post 69 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Also above and beyond , people at both cbcs and CGC do more than grade..they engage in areas like restoration and removal, slabbing, cleaning , pressing, and many other aspects of the hobby that are in fact sciences...slabbing a book is a science and relies on skill sets and knowledge as does spotting restoration. Neither is objective...they are all fields. | ||
| Post 70 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Nope. You just want to argue nonsense. See directly below. It's called expounding. When you fail to understand the definition at face value, someone else has to educate you. There are no authorities in comic book grading. Otherwise, dealers grading their own comics would be meaningless. Observing the grade of your own raw comics would be meaningless. Comic book grading existed before CGC and CBCS, and it will exist if both of them 'go under'. People won't be lost without them. |
||
| Post 71 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town None of this is correct. If it was a "science" it wouldn't go undetected. Grading, including restoration detection, conservation, etc are all skills. None are sciences. Often times, in-house, their own graders can't agree on if a dot of Sharpie is a defect or "restoration". That's not how a science would work. People can't even objectively detect trimming. If CGC and CBCS can't be absolute then they cannot be authoritative. |
||
| Post 72 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Your efforts to educate are failing, simply becaue there is more than one definition of authority as I posted. A person possessing a set of skills or knowledge clearly meets that criteria. Anything else you attach to that contention is simply no sequitar. it doesn't matter what dealers do, or what I do....or for that matter when comic grading became a thing, or even if people would or would not be lost without them. They are authorities by definition of posessing a great skill or knowledge ina given area or field.....I don't think anyone here would care to argue Steve Borock does not have great expertise or knowledge, let alone skill. Is that your implication? |
||
| Post 73 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town That's obvious. One can only lead a horse to water... Nope. A skilled person is not an authority on how art must be appreciated. Because that's not how authority or subjectivity works. You keep ignoring context just to argue nonsense. |
||
| Post 74 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Is a mechanic an authority on the issues a car can suffer? I would suggest yes..is a chef an authority on how to prepare food...I would say yes...is an artist an authority on artwork ..yes. Does that mean they have the final say or are know alls or can order or demand things..no. Then again those are not required for the definintion of authority to be met are they? The dictionary gives a clear set of meanings for the word. I am applying that whereas you are placing conditional relations to the terms which are not given. You have been educated, take care |
||
| Post 75 • IP flag post | ||
 I have a problem with fattening women up.
|
Bronte private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Sometimes it's best to let things go. Not because you are wrong, but because some folks just like to rile people up. | ||
| Post 76 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by theCapraAegagrusIncidentally I am not a horse to be led...nor is your contortion of definitions any form of water so much as perhaps kool aid. |
||
| Post 77 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Darkseid_of_town private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by BronteQuote: Originally Posted by Brontelol you noticed that too, good morning Bronte |
||
| Post 78 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Darkseid_of_town Mechanics deal in science. That's how context works. A chef is not an authority on how to prepare food. Cooking is a skill - not a science. Again, this is how context works. You would say "yes", and be wrong. Objective spectators would say no. Did you even read the definitions you posted, or just trolling the 1 line in the last one...? Authorities have objectives that they do order/demand. Again, it's called "context". It matters. In the context of mechanics, science has mechanical engineering authority. Food prep doesn't. Comic book grading doesn't. As talented as Mr. Borock is, he can grade a comic book, and anyone is free to disagree with the number he chooses. Neither person can be incorrect. You see this disparity even between the 2 largest grading groups. There is no authority. |
||
| Post 79 • IP flag post | ||
|
PLOD
|
theCapraAegagrus private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Bronte You're right. I just don't like people spreading misinformation. It's a waste of time when speaking into deaf ears, though. |
||
| Post 80 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?