View Single Post
  #32  
Old 05-24-2011, 08:09 PM
thecatspajamas's Avatar
thecatspajamas thecatspajamas is offline
L@nce Fit.tro
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Franklin, TN
Posts: 2,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdschulze View Post
I don't know Lou or Matt but I do know this forum is full of threads pertaining to bad sellers, ebay scams, and fake autos/cards. A lot of us do not have the expertise as some of the other members here and rely on their expert advice.... for learning purposes. I personally do not have a problem "outing" a potential bad seller. Maybe I purchased something from the same seller a few years ago and need to recheck the validity of the item. Had Matt (and others) not posted their experience(s) publicly, how would I know any different?
I personally don't have a problem with outing fraudulent sellers, but I DO have a problem with outing a seller before they've been shown to be fraudulent. I think if the OP wanted to get a truly unbiased opinion of the authenticity of the autograph, his original post should have shown only the ball and not named where it came from. If he's only trying to decide whether or not it's a waste of money to send it in for authentication, then who sold it to him is irrelevent. Once he's gotten several opinions and checked with the seller on how they want to handle the situation, then report back on what an upstanding guy he is or, if there are problems, THEN call the bum out. But when you name names in the first post, you are automatically putting the seller on the defensive and potentially tainting any feedback about the signature itself.

It's all water under the bridge now, and I will add my applause to the others going out to Lou for his handling of the situation. But I don't think it's appropriate in these situations to get out the spotlights and air horns as an opening move. Later on, sure, we should all be informed when there's a rotten apple, but for goodness sake have some proof before you start using names. Suppose Lou hadn't been around to give his side? Just because there was no PR damage this time doesn't mean that this sequence of events should be accepted.

Am I off in my thinking on this? It just seems like gentlemen should settle matters between themselves and only resort to public accusations when those private conversations break down. I can't imagine this thread would have gone as smoothly if Lou had not piped up as soon as he had, and I don't think a seller should be required to patrol the boards for their name just in case they have to defend themselves.

Lance
Reply With Quote