Disgusted with CGC at the moment... 4 4

[KryptoSpidey]

4 hours ago, Iconic1s said:

If anyone is still interested in these notes... here they are.  I'm chalking up the $5.00 as part of my education to add to my learning experience with my Avengers #4 crease/tear experience.

Notes don't mention the centerfold is missing.  I imagine anyone really looking for a centerfold would not have been 100% deterred by these notes, other than what seems to be the overall brittleness of the book.  My guess is that even if the centerfold was there, it may not have been one worth trying to put in another book.  Based on these notes it probably would have fell apart, but I would have bought it anyways to give it a try if I was desperate.  If it ended up not even being there at all after I bought these notes I'd be pretty irritated.

Only the OP knows how upset to be about this I guess.  If it were me I would probably contact CGC just to see what they say.

Guess i ruffled a few noobs feathers along the way too .  

Suck it up buttercup(s) .  

Edited June 22, 2020 by KryptoSpidey

[KryptoSpidey]

10 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

I'm wondering whether I've just misunderstood what you're seeking to do here Lightning. If you're talking purely about the 'who follows this' box at the top of every thread / forum...

....then all you have to do if you don't want people to see that you are one of the followers is untick the 'Let others see that I follow this' box as below:

If you want to apply that concept to every thread / forum you follow, then follow my earlier 'Managed Followed Content' instructions and that will stop you showing as a follower of that thread to those who click on the 'see who follows this' button.

From that point, every new thread you decide to follow, untick the box.

I was just trying to answer Lightning's question Krypto. and failing from the looks of it!

I don't think it's a big deal whether people want to lurk or not - it's their business. The functionality is there, use it, don't use it. I don't use it much myself but can see how some guilty pleasure scenario might manifest - you don't want people to see you're following a car crash thread maybe, that kind of thing. Like admitting you liked Abba back in the day 

ABBA ah you have me at ABBA  

In reality just ruffling feathers buddy. I'm an open book and i just don't understand the not wanting people to know what you are looking at here on the boards. We are, or should be, an open minded community as it was. People like Muscle Shark, Danny D, ect left a bad taste for people lurking, or at least it should be remembered by longtime boardies....and learned by noobs. 

[kav]

@Buzzetta

[Hollywood1892]

GTA ONLINE is wicked....oh sorry, wrong thread

[Iconic1s]

Hey, did anybody else notice that centerfold missing! 

[Buzzetta]

34 minutes ago, kav said:

@Buzzetta

You are late by about two beers, a day, and a Comicdonna. 

[Lightning55]

The thing is.....I don't lurk.  Whatever I am following is visible, always has been, to my knowledge.  I just wanted to know how the different settings work.  I also like to skim through owner's manuals when I get a new device, or car, etc.  I want to know what everything does.  Lots of things we have don't get used to their full potential.

But it was ASSUMED that I must be a lurker (not that there's anything wrong with that, as they say on Seinfeld).  I just set my areas of interest, get notifications, check some out, skip some, reply if I can be of any help, provide an opinion if someone is "polling" something - maybe.  I didn't have a reason to lurk, until maybe now.

I've been into comics close to 60 years.  Professional grading is relatively new to me, a year or so, picking up some info here.  That's my whole involvement.  Maybe get to buy and sell a couple of things down the road.

And then there's this: "a 146 IQ and owning a business, I'm a competitive surfer who traveled the world for decades. I have an oceanfront home, probably bought and sold more this month in books than you do in 5 years"  followed by " I don't puff my chest"

THAT'S funny.

[Buzzetta]

 

I may or may not be one of the people now silently watching this thread so I can get a copy of every post sent to my email before the whole thread gets nuked.

[kav]

21 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

 

I may or may not be one of the people now silently watching this thread so I can get a copy of every post sent to my email before the whole thread gets nuked.

I cant wait for Buzz's book "My life on the CGC Boards" with the compendium he has been compiling.

[theCapraAegagrus]

A reminder that CGC is not an authority.

Unfortunate experience.

[Hollywood1892]

6 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

A reminder that CGC is not an authority.

Unfortunate experience.

Are you saying authorities on subjects are incapable of making errors because i never heard that before. I guess there is not a single authority, anywhere on the planet then.

Edited June 23, 2020 by Hollywood1892

[ThothAmon]

On 6/22/2020 at 12:01 PM, Iconic1s said:

Notes don't mention the centerfold is missing.  I imagine anyone really looking for a centerfold would not have been 100% deterred by these notes, other than what seems to be the overall brittleness of the book.  My guess is that even if the centerfold was there, it may not have been one worth trying to put in another book.  Based on these notes it probably would have fell apart, but I would have bought it anyways to give it a try if I was desperate.  If it ended up not even being there at all after I bought these notes I'd be pretty irritated.

Not sure CGC really owes much of an explanation here as the grade the book received is consistent with incomplete books and the book has brittle pages.  Not that I know for sure but the grader may have felt more damage would occur by counting and the grade wouldn't change regardless.  From what I can tell this particular mistake is about as common as getting struck by lightning. The OP should maybe take this as a sign that someone doesn't like marrying books with brittle pages and wait to find a nice ow coverless copy!  

[theCapraAegagrus]

16 hours ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Are you saying authorities on subjects are incapable of making errors because i never heard that before. I guess there is not a single authority, anywhere on the planet then.

Nope. CGC simply isn't an authority.

[kav]

8 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Nope. CGC simply isn't an authority.

Who is the authority on comic book grading?
Authority: a person or persons with extensive or specialized knowledge about a subject; an expert.

Edited June 24, 2020 by kav

[theCapraAegagrus]

15 minutes ago, kav said:

Who is the authority on comic book grading?
Authority: a person or persons with extensive or specialized knowledge about a subject; an expert.

That particular vague sub-definition doesn't apply to comic book grading.

None of CGC, CBCS, PGX, Overstreet, etc etc etc have authority on grading. They all have different standards. None of them are authorities over your own opinion of a comic book's grades, for instance. CGC is a group of people comprised of individual "experts".

If there was a universally objective standard to appeal to, then I would concede that they have authority. However; No such thing exists. See: Getting a CGC 9.6, cracking it and re-sending it, resulting in a CGC 9.8.

Edited to add: CGC graders are authorities on CGC grading standards.

Edited June 24, 2020 by theCapraAegagrus

[kav]

1 minute ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

That particular vague sub-definition doesn't apply to comic book grading.

None of CGC, CBCS, PGX, Overstreet, etc etc etc have authority on grading. They all have different standards. None of them are authorities over your own opinion of a comic book's grades, for instance. CGC is a group of people comprised of individual "experts".

If there was a universally objective standard to appeal to, then I would concede that they have authority. However; No such thing exists. See: Getting a CGC 9.6, cracking it and re-sending it, resulting in a CGC 9.8.

Edited to add: CGC is an authority on CGC grading standards.

Since doctors, scientists, etc disagree and one might give something one analysis, and another a different one, as in your example of getting a 9.6 and a 9.8, then there are no authorities anywhere on earth, by your definition, as Hollywood pointed out.
Yeah no.
Proof they are an authority is people send them books to grade, and pay them, and others pay for those books based upon what grade CGC gave it.
 

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, kav said:

Since doctors, scientists, etc disagree and one might give something one analysis, and another a different one, as in your example of getting a 9.6 and a 9.8, then there are no authorities anywhere on earth, by your definition, as Hollywood pointed out.
Yeah no.
Proof they are an authority is people send them books to grade, and pay them, and others pay for those books based upon what grade CGC gave it.

Are ladies of the night authorities? Free market economics do not by default create authorities.

CGC is not an authority on grading comics. They have competitors that do not appeal to CGC's standards. Others would be foolish (IMO) to call PGX an "authority". People pay them to grade comics, too, after all.

[kav]

12 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Are ladies of the night authorities? Free market economics do not by default create authorities.

CGC is not an authority on grading comics. They have competitors that do not appeal to CGC's standards. Others would be foolish (IMO) to call PGX an "authority". People pay them to grade comics, too, after all.

Ladies of the night are not paid to give an expert opinion.  Bad analogy.
The PGX market is so tiny compared to CGC you make my point for me.  People come to CGC, and pay more, because they are an authority.
You are not an authority on what constitutes an authority-the market of knowledgeable collectors is.

[Gaard]

What difference does it make in regards to this thread?

[ThothAmon]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

That particular vague sub-definition doesn't apply to comic book grading.

None of CGC, CBCS, PGX, Overstreet, etc etc etc have authority on grading. They all have different standards. None of them are authorities over your own opinion of a comic book's grades, for instance. CGC is a group of people comprised of individual "experts".

If there was a universally objective standard to appeal to, then I would concede that they have authority. However; No such thing exists. See: Getting a CGC 9.6, cracking it and re-sending it, resulting in a CGC 9.8.

Edited to add: CGC graders are authorities on CGC grading standards.

 

1 hour ago, kav said:

Since doctors, scientists, etc disagree and one might give something one analysis, and another a different one, as in your example of getting a 9.6 and a 9.8, then there are no authorities anywhere on earth, by your definition, as Hollywood pointed out.
Yeah no.
Proof they are an authority is people send them books to grade, and pay them, and others pay for those books based upon what grade CGC gave it.
 

But can a shark beat a dolphin in a fight?  CGC is enough of an "insert synonym to authority" on comic book grading for it to be trusted on million dollar deals.