The "Newsstand Edition" Phenomenon
4 4

323 posts in this topic

4,865 posts
6 hours ago, joeypost said:

Call me "dopey", but it appears he broke his own rule of not making it personal.

No, he was talking about the actions of people who were not posting here. Way different than arguing with somebody here and moving the argument away from the subject into personal comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,865 posts
10 hours ago, xcomic said:

Appreciate that @Lazyboy, thank you.   That he was banned does not surprise me given what he wrote to me and it would have been impossible to share because every other word was profanity; it also shows that banned members can indeed read the messages.  The fact that it appears to be your knowledge (and probably also common knowledge) that he occasionally creates new accounts which are later also banned, confirms to me that my assessment of the environment here was correct: any working email address is the single prerequisite to establish a fully-anonymous handle here, and then utilize that anonymous handle to smear a real person's real name with fully anonymous words that go on to become part of the public online record.  I must say as a long-time CGC customer it makes me upset that they have built this capability into the DNA of these boards,

I actually like Stu, but he does go too far sometimes.

If somebody signs up just to cause trouble, the mods usually wipe out all traces of their account.

10 hours ago, xcomic said:

which should really be for friendly conversations about comics among CGC's customers.

Let me stop you right there. I'm here only because this is the best comic book message board there is. I have learned a ton here over the years. But I don't collect slabs and I've never submitted anything to CGC. Not that I'm against it, it has just never been worth it for me.

10 hours ago, xcomic said:

  Since CGC has all of our credit cards on file

Nope.

10 hours ago, xcomic said:

 and could in theory improve upon this problem by having a one-alias-per-customer policy enforced by matching up each handle to a credit card, it is within their power to create a better message board environment.

They could finish the destruction of the boards that many people claim they started with the switch to new software (traffic was actually declining before that, but the change didn't help). Killing the boards is not in CGC's best interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts

Hi @Lazyboy, thank you for being forthright; I'm liking you a little more each time we talk.  You say the mods usually wipe all traces of bad accounts, but that is reactive instead of proactive, plus it is insufficient:  by the time the bad stuff is wiped, lots of people here have seen it, potentially shared the link to anyone in the world, and the bots in Russia that scour for Dirt potentially connecting to names of political figures (or future potential candidates) have already digested it and patted their robot tummies.

I have two questions for you if you don't mind:
(1) Would you be willing to pay a $1 (One Dollar) Message Board Handle Fee good from today until the expiration of your current credit card, in the interest of CGC enforcing a one-handle-per-person policy?
(2) How many handles per person do you feel is appropriate, if not one?

- Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts
16 hours ago, comix4fun said:

The whole thing is weird.

Hi @comix4fun, among the various handles here I am very focused on yours because of your role as neutral mediator, and I was hoping because of this, that you would allow me to share an observation about something you said, describing this whole thing as "weird"...

Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) has a very interesting way of describing how it is possible for people to experience different versions of reality at the same time; as he puts it: watching two different movies on the same one screen.  In our case, the screen is this thread here.  But different people are watching different movies, and their brains are automatically trying to "fit" all new information into the movie they've been watching.

Movie #1, as presented by RMA, has Jon as a liar, me as a fraud, and the single thing motivating our entire participation in this hobby being: $$$.

Movie #2 features an enterprising young writer who is passionate about comics, works hard to showcase his talent stack by way of a blog, in doing so attracts the attention of many of the great minds in our hobby in the price variant niche, and then goes on to collaborate as part of a six man team on a large-scale project that contributes a resource to the hobby which it has never had before now.  Along the way, the writer is treated badly by a multi-aliased individual, chooses to Block that individual from their comments forum, and is immediately Retaliated against, here, with public accusations of fraud.  Seeing their name (and their friend's) permanently associated with these accusations in the public record, the writer chooses to append  the public record with their side of the story, so that any future reader pulling the thread from the public record can make up their own minds...

Perhaps that "weird" feeling your brain gave you, was the recognition that there seems to be something very weird with Movie #1 and it is no longer fitting what you are seeing on the screen.  Movie #2 is much nicer, plus, I think you will find it has superior predictive value for what will happen next.  Try jumping to it and seeing what you think.

- Ben
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,233 posts
8 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

No, he was talking about the actions of people who were not posting here. Way different than arguing with somebody here and moving the argument away from the subject into personal comments.

If I misinterpreted the comments I stand corrected. I don't think I did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,695 posts
31 minutes ago, xcomic said:

Hi @comix4fun, among the various handles here I am very focused on yours because of your role as neutral mediator, and I was hoping because of this, that you would allow me to share an observation about something you said, describing this whole thing as "weird"...

Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) has a very interesting way of describing how it is possible for people to experience different versions of reality at the same time; as he puts it: watching two different movies on the same one screen.  In our case, the screen is this thread here.  But different people are watching different movies, and their brains are automatically trying to "fit" all new information into the movie they've been watching.

Movie #1, as presented by RMA, has Jon as a liar, me as a fraud, and the single thing motivating our entire participation in this hobby being: $$$.

Movie #2 features an enterprising young writer who is passionate about comics, works hard to showcase his talent stack by way of a blog, in doing so attracts the attention of many of the great minds in our hobby in the price variant niche, and then goes on to collaborate as part of a six man team on a large-scale project that contributes a resource to the hobby which it has never had before now.  Along the way, the writer is treated badly by a multi-aliased individual, chooses to Block that individual from their comments forum, and is immediately Retaliated against, here, with public accusations of fraud.  Seeing their name (and their friend's) permanently associated with these accusations in the public record, the writer chooses to append  the public record with their side of the story, so that any future reader pulling the thread from the public record can make up their own minds...

Perhaps that "weird" feeling your brain gave you, was the recognition that there seems to be something very weird with Movie #1 and it is no longer fitting what you are seeing on the screen.  Movie #2 is much nicer, plus, I think you will find it has superior predictive value for what will happen next.  Try jumping to it and seeing what you think.

- Ben
 

I think, respectfully, most people are watching an entirely different movie than those two polar options. 

He's most likely somewhere north of Satan and you're probably somewhere south of Gabriel. 

This is a community, and how long or short, positive or negative, informed or vapid your participation is in it will determine what "movie" people are watching. 

We've seen scholars and students come and go. We've also seen rogues and pillagers do the same. 

Take this up to an overhead view, away from RMA's response to your blocking him and away from your understandable desire to defend your reputation, and there's a chance you might see things how everyone else (who is not similarly embroiled) sees it. 

When a particular position is taken, stating potentially debatable points as if they were established facts, and there's potentially money on the line for people "buying" into that particular position (rarity in comics has been batted around like a pinata for decades), cutting short a dissenting voice of opinion will lead people to believe that it is not the ultimate truth of the statement that is most valued but the current position instead. If the current position is more valued than a more correct one it leads people to ask "Why?" or better yet "What motivation does that person have to cutting off a dissenting opinion that would bring the original contention closer to accurate in favor of a less correct or less complete position?"

Cutting off those comments and communication leads to a whole host of motivational questions and (in the vacuum of discussion) assumptions. 

Now you've mentioned wanting to include his viewpoint or his information in your postings regarding this topic. That type of position, at the outset, would have most likely prevented the questions and assumptions about ulterior motivations brought about by the blocking. As I said no one is perfect and that goes for their sainthood or their villainy. Your reaction to RMA's posts on your blog may have not been the most well thought out or dispassionate decision, but it's one that most people would probably understand or empathize with. RMA's post here may have been far more incendiary and strongly worded than most people would have posted, but they can understand the underlying concern he raises and preceding events leading to it even if the vessel is too potent for some. 

I wouldn't want anyone besmirching my name, especially if my goals were altruistic in nature. Online writing and posting has evolved dramatically since its inception but it's still far more crude and far easier to misunderstand than in-person or vocal communication. It still lacks enough personal weight to bridge the gap between everyone speaking the same language and everyone understanding one another. I think you both could have handled this in a way that didn't escalate the situation to where it has arrived, and until everyone involved recognizes the lack of perfection in their road to this point I don't think it will get amicably resolved, which it probably should. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts

Hi @comix4fun -- great, let's get it resolved; thank you for mediating.  And I accept that my own movie when observing RMA and the way they treated me may not be the same movie they themselves (and others here) were watching.  Like you all, my brain fit what I was seeing into the movie, where hearing of things like bans and suspensions and simulcasting could easily have led to confirmation bias, toward my conclusion this was a person I should absolutely avoid interacting with any further.  My offer and their reaction to it (as mediated by you) will inform me as to whether there is actually a way for us to work together  (in a sense), for the benefit of the hobby, by my reaching out -- through you -- for quotes from them.  Not just the 500 word spotlight quote I offered here, but potentially in the future as well on topics I may choose to write about where they can provide interesting and knowledgeable input.   I look forward to hearing back from you passing along their decision as to how to respond to my offer.  When do you anticipate they will let you know and when do you anticipate you will be able to post it here?

- Ben

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,695 posts
2 minutes ago, xcomic said:

Hi @comix4fun -- great, let's get it resolved; thank you for mediating.  And I accept that my own movie when observing RMA and the way they treated me may not be the same movie they themselves (and others here) were watching.  Like you all, my brain fit what I was seeing into the movie, where hearing of things like bans and suspensions and simulcasting could easily have led to confirmation bias, toward my conclusion this was a person I should absolutely avoid interacting with any further.  My offer and their reaction to it (as mediated by you) will inform me as to whether there is actually a way for us to work together  (in a sense), for the benefit of the hobby, by my reaching out -- through you -- for quotes from them.  Not just the 500 word spotlight quote I offered here, but potentially in the future as well on topics I may choose to write about where they can provide interesting and knowledgeable input.   I look forward to hearing back from you passing along their decision as to how to respond to my offer.  When do you anticipate they will let you know and when do you anticipate you will be able to post it here?

- Ben

 

RMA should speak for himself. I can let him know what generally what you said but he should read it for himself and he should respond to you directly. The telephone game always stuck with me since I was a 1st grader, worst way of communicating. 

He should be back in a short amount of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts
7 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

RMA should speak for himself. I can let him know what generally what you said but he should read it for himself and he should respond to you directly. The telephone game always stuck with me since I was a 1st grader, worst way of communicating.  He should be back in a short amount of time. 

No.  I will only work with a mediator after what has transpired here.  A mediator is critical to conflict resolution.  I thought you would be a good choice, but if you will not do it, and your quote suggests you will not, that speaks volumes to me.  Will anybody else here volunteer to replace @comix4fun as official mediator since they appear to be "bowing out" of that role?  Thanks in advance to anyone who will step forward -- and perhaps @comix4fun can weigh in on whether the person who steps forward as replacement mediator is a good choice.

- Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,695 posts
6 minutes ago, xcomic said:

No.  I will only work with a mediator after what has transpired here.  A mediator is critical to conflict resolution.  I thought you would be a good choice, but if you will not do it, and your quote suggests you will not, that speaks volumes to me.  Will anybody else here volunteer to replace @comix4fun as official mediator since they appear to be "bowing out" of that role?  Thanks in advance to anyone who will step forward -- and perhaps @comix4fun can weigh in on whether the person who steps forward as replacement mediator is a good choice.

- Ben

What about it "speaks volumes" ? 

I think I was pretty clear that, in a situation where there's a high likelihood that you each misunderstood each other's words and motivations, that direct and unambiguous communication would be the only real way to solve the dispute. 

Your words have to be yours, from you, and the same from RMA. Given what's transpired I'd think that everyone involved would want a second chance to get the communication right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts
1 minute ago, comix4fun said:

What about it "speaks volumes" ? 

I think I was pretty clear that, in a situation where there's a high likelihood that you each misunderstood each other's words and motivations, that direct and unambiguous communication would be the only real way to solve the dispute. 

Your words have to be yours, from you, and the same from RMA. Given what's transpired I'd think that everyone involved would want a second chance to get the communication right. 

Absolutely wrong.  Direct communication across this broken-DNA of a message board platform will solve zero and everyone watching Movie #2 knows it.  The one and only  way to any kind of a real resolution would be through a mediator.  The reason your "bowing out" of this mediator role speaks volumes to me, is that it serves as confirmation bias that this person is intolerable to deal with directly: you may say  otherwise and give reasons to excuse your newfound rejection of the mediator role, but the only thing I am focused on is your actions.   The action I observe is you are now bowing out  of the mediator role you previously stepped into.

- Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,695 posts
6 minutes ago, xcomic said:

Absolutely wrong.  Direct communication across this broken-DNA of a message board platform will solve zero and everyone watching Movie #2 knows it.  The one and only  way to any kind of a real resolution would be through a mediator.  The reason your "bowing out" of this mediator role speaks volumes to me, is that it serves as confirmation bias that this person is intolerable to deal with directly: you may say  otherwise and give reasons to excuse your newfound rejection of the mediator role, but the only thing I am focused on is your actions.   The action I observe is you are now bowing out  of the mediator role you previously stepped into.

- Ben

I never volunteered to mediate...you volunteer'd me. lol I didn't "bow in" in the first place. 

I gave you my opinion of the situation and added information that became available to me. That's it.

Given how you've turned that around to make it look like I auditioned for this role and sought it out and accepted it tells me that I am the WRONG person to get involved in some three way communication game as you can't get communication between you and I right and you're speaking directly to me. 

These constant conclusions and exaggerated characterizations of peoples actions and reasons for those actions tell me that if this gap fails to get bridged it's not going to be because of a lack of a mediator. I don't need to jump in the middle of any new ongoing fights, I'm already married. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts
4 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

I never volunteered to mediate...you volunteer'd me. lol I didn't "bow in" in the first place. 

You bowed in the moment you spoke on behalf of the court of public opinion and polled the judges.  Read the transcript.  I then nominated you as mediator, asked if I could count on you as mediator, consistently referred to you as mediator (which you never once corrected), and now you're pretending you never had anything to do with it.

But no matter.  Let's find a new mediator.  Who will please step forward?

- Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 posts
6 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

That's just silly Ben, it is. Just because you deem something so doesn't make it so.

You're right, I was just testing you.  You failed.  Next mediator please.

- Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,695 posts
8 minutes ago, xcomic said:

You're right, I was just testing you.  You failed.  Next mediator please.

- Ben

 

So basically, you're Louie Dumps from "A Bronx Tale", and this conversation is the $20. 

I'll always be grateful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,846 posts
On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 3:03 PM, shadroch said:

And the thread goes off the track as RMa argues incessantly over the meaning of someone's  words. It was fun while it lasted.  

:headbang:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,846 posts

It is hard to remember, but this was actually a nice fun thread for awhile. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4