1936 Joltin' Joe

[Leon]

Yes. Apparently you missed the fact that this exact same sort of thing happened recently with the T206 autograph forger thread. Manny (Setbuilder) is banned for bad registration info too, after 7 yrs and over 600 posts. It doesn't matter how long or how many posts someone has done, bad registration info always gets the boot. If it is corrected they are reinstated. Neither of these members wanted to give good contact info instead of staying banned...It is their call, not mine. I didn't have anything against either one, whomever they are.

Originally Posted by timn1

Are we talking about Renne, who has posted 92 times and been on the board for almost two years?

Tim

PS: I don't doubt what you're saying at all - just trying to keep up with this very strange story...

[timn1]

I agree, bad registration info is definitely grounds for banning- thanks-

T

Originally Posted by Leon

Yes. Apparently you missed the fact that this exact same sort of thing happened recently with the T206 autograph forger thread. Manny (Setbuilder) is banned for bad registration info too, after 7 yrs and over 600 posts. It doesn't matter how long or how many posts someone has done, bad registration info always gets the boot. If it is corrected they are reinstated. Neither of these members wanted to give good contact info instead of staying banned...It is their call, not mine. I didn't have anything against either one, whomever they are.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by timn1

I agree, bad registration info is definitely grounds for banning- thanks-

T

Hi Tim
I denote a bit of sarcasm, but maybe not. At any rate I don't feel someone should be a allowed to out a fraudster while being a fraudster. Somewhere it is called a clean hands doctrine. In this forum world you have to have clean hands to combat fraud yourself. No fraudsters allowed to detect other fraudsters. And if nothing else their registrations are fraudulent. I watch too much Judge Judy. Wouldn't it be something if one of these really was Nash? One of the biggest fraudsters the hobby has ever known fighting crime. Sweet....

,

[pokerplyr80]

Sounds reasonable Leon. Since the one rule around here is a name on posts with opinions it would be hard to enforce if people are registering with fake info.

It also seems very odd that the guy wanted to buy the card he outed as doctored. Can any of our site detectives determine what that's all about?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Sounds reasonable Leon. Since the one rule around here is a name on posts with opinions it would be hard to enforce if people are registering with fake info.

It also seems very odd that the guy wanted to buy the card he outed as doctored. Can any of our site detectives determine what that's all about?

It was 2 years ago maybe he hadn't put it together at the time with the earlier iteration.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It was 2 years ago maybe he hadn't put it together at the time with the earlier iteration.

It still seems very odd at best. How many posts have you seen that say "I want to buy this card" and have a picture of said card in the wtb listing? I recall maybe 1 or 2 where it was a previously owned card that held sentimental significance.

[timn1]

No, I totally agree with you (you were thrown off by my being sincere for a change)- if someone is unwilling to provide their actual info to the moderator, then they should be banned-

Originally Posted by Leon

Hi Tim
I denote a bit of sarcasm, but maybe not. At any rate I don't feel someone should be a allowed to out a fraudster while being a fraudster. Somewhere it is called a clean hands doctrine. In this forum world you have to have clean hands to combat fraud yourself. No fraudsters allowed to detect other fraudsters. And if nothing else their registrations are fraudulent. I watch too much Judge Judy. Wouldn't it be something if one of these really was Nash? One of the biggest fraudsters the hobby has ever known fighting crime. Sweet....

,

[bigfanNY]

With the current Authentic vs 6.5 Controversy thought I would bump this up. A different scenario but Another 36 WWG Joe D.

[Yoda]

I agree that the card graded 7 has been trimmed but can't help wondering if they might be 2 different cards. I say this because to my eye the centering appears slightly different; the graded 5 seems to have 50/50 centering while the 7 is more 70/30. Not trying to be the Devil's Advocate, just the way the cards appear to my eye.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Yoda

I agree that the card graded 7 has been trimmed but can't help wondering if they might be 2 different cards. I say this because to my eye the centering appears slightly different; the graded 5 seems to have 50/50 centering while the 7 is more 70/30. Not trying to be the Devil's Advocate, just the way the cards appear to my eye.

If you look at all the photos posted on the first page, then you will see that they are not two different cards. Somebody trimmed the left and right edges of that SGC 5 and turned it into an SGC 7.

And what's even more f**ked up is that SGC did nothing about it (despite all the evidence that clearly shows both L&R edges being trimmed). It is still up on their database:

SEARCHED AUTH CODE:
2300782
Set:
1936 World Wide Gum Co.
Card #:
51
Subject:
Joe Di Maggio
Description:
-
Graded On:
June 2011
Grade:
7 NM