I am not making any statements from personal experiences, I have gone against the grain several times on here and stand behind it and nobody has ever been rude to me for it. However, it seems the overwhelming opinion on here is that everything borderline with any issue at all is fake. While the Major Authenticators are not perfect and make mistakes, the autograph world is better for having some sort of authentication in place and they do eliminate a lot of high end forgeries. They get it right WAY more often than they get it wrong, but people love to make it seem like they are bumbling idiots. It just seems like when an authenticated signature is called into question, the popular thing to do is pretend you know more than the authenticators (and sometimes you do) and say things are bad. If we just posted things we knew were good and all agreed with the authenticator, then why post it?
Not bitter, it just seems that is the trend on here (malicious or innocent), post something borderline, call attention to it, and criticize the authenticators. Maybe thats a good thing, I dont know, but if that is the end game, you're not going to get many people to "take the bait", because the agenda is clear and its not "This thing is Good, the authenticators got it right".
Just my opinion,
Rhys
|