Happy Festivus! Airing of Grievances 2024 Edition

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Straw man. The issue is not did the policy require it. The issue is, was it a pragmatic thing to do under the circumstances to establish values for a worst case scenario.

Not just the part i made bold but an owner of some of those stolen cards posted in the original thread that he was told by the AH both the PoPo and the insurance company told them to run the auction. The naysayers completely ignored that post even when I pointed it out more than once. But hay what do the professionals know?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Not just the part i made bold but an owner of some of those stolen cards posted in the original thread that he was told by the AH both the PoPo and the insurance company told them to run the auction. The naysayers completely ignored that post even when I pointed it out more than once. But hay what do the professionals know?

Right. And if that happened, the fact that it might not have been an express requirement of the policy (Greg's favorite straw man) again is not the issue. Under these circumstances, an insured is likely to do what its insurer requests. And you can see why the insurer would have requested it, to simplify the potential upcoming claims process. Best case, the cards are found and no claims are made; worst case you get valuations.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Not just the part i made bold but an owner of some of those stolen cards posted in the original thread that he was told by the AH both the PoPo and the insurance company told them to run the auction. The naysayers completely ignored that post even when I pointed it out more than once. But hay what do the professionals know?

Hmm, lots of responses from said naysayers since this post, but not a single one acknowledged it. I wonder why?

I also find it very strange that the entire premise of the complaint seems to be that an individual selling their own cards couldn't do it, so why should a consignor be able to, as if there aren't extremely major legal differences in those two roles.

There is a reason both the police and the insurance company said to run the auction. There are a lot of legal rights at play here from many different parties. Running the auction and sorting out the fallout in court later was the only valid play from a legal standpoint.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

Hmm, lots of responses from said naysayers since this post, but not a single one acknowledged it. I wonder why?

I also find it very strange that the entire premise of the complaint seems to be that an individual selling their own cards couldn't do it, so why should a consignor be able to, as if there aren't extremely major legal differences in those two roles.

There is a reason both the police and the insurance company said to run the auction. There are a lot of legal rights at play here from many different parties. Running the auction and sorting out the fallout in court later was the only valid play from a legal standpoint.

I would love love to get confirmation on this statement. The insurance company maybe, but I am pretty sure the police did not weigh in on this.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I would love love to get confirmation on this statement. The insurance company maybe, but I am pretty sure the police did not weigh in on this.

That will never happen . As I recall, these hypotheticals were raised so much in the thread that a speculative statement became read by the ML fanboys desperate to defend them for any reason as an actual fact. I still find it extremely dubious that they would be ordered, via the world's most unique insurance policies, or insurance company decisions that surely violate the actual contract that absolutely does not require this method of valuation, or the police, to host a fraudulent auction that is illegal under state law and then also would never point to that to justify their course in their announcements. We all know, very obviously, that this was not the only valid play from a legal standpoint. Running fake fraudulent auctions illegal under state law was not the only thing they could have done.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by G1911

That will never happen . As I recall, these hypotheticals were raised so much in the thread that a speculative statement became read by the ML fanboys desperate to defend them for any reason as an actual fact. I still find it extremely dubious that they would be ordered, via the world's most unique insurance policies, or insurance company decisions that surely violate the actual contract that absolutely does not require this method of valuation, or the police, to host a fraudulent auction that is illegal under state law and then also would never point to that to justify their course in their announcements. We all know, very obviously, that this was not the only valid play from a legal standpoint. Running fake fraudulent auctions illegal under state law was not the only thing they could have done.

I know you aren't intersted in truth. You are only interested in confirming your own pre-determined beliefs. So I won't bother. I've gone down that road with you before, and I'm not going to do it again. But just know that I'm a prosecutor. I not only know the law, but I advise police. And your assertions are incorrect on both counts.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

I know you aren't intersted in truth. You are only interested in confirming your own pre-determined beliefs. So I won't bother. I've gone down that road with you before, and I'm not going to do it again. But just know that I'm a prosecutor. I not only know the law, but I advise police. And your assertions are incorrect on both counts.

If you read the thread you would see we had lawyers in the correct state, not a different one, post the actual relevant laws without appeal to self-authority. Memory Lane hosting a fraudulent auction was not and never was "the only valid play". No real insurance company in the entire history of the world has ever demanded a customer run a fake, fraudulent auction for items they do not have nor had a policy requiring such to value items. If the police required it, which seems highly dubious they also would demand commission of a crime, Memory Lane would have been able to point to that event. They never did. All we have is a double standard by Memory Lane's fans to excuse them by lying about events or assuming unique events for which there is not a shred of proof forced their hand and required the auction, which of course wasn't wrong in the first place, but only not wrong for them.

Nolan Ryan and Gaylord Perry posted pretty similar career values to each other, using the old stats or the new. I'm sorry. A lot of things are true that I don't like either.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by G1911

a fake, fraudulent auction

You keep using this description, but that's not at all what happened in this case.

Any lawyer in that thread claiming it was criminal to run those consignment auctions either doesn't know what they are talking about, or are like you, in that they made up their minds and weren't interested in thinking through the legal issues of the case.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

I know you aren't intersted in truth. You are only interested in confirming your own pre-determined beliefs. So I won't bother. I've gone down that road with you before, and I'm not going to do it again. But just know that I'm a prosecutor. I not only know the law, but I advise police. And your assertions are incorrect on both counts.

My favorite part is how he makes stuff up and then argues that it isn't true. I am not sure who he is in real life but he expects everyone on here to tell him everything with proof yet has nothing in return to offer. I appreciate all his posts. The good ones and the ones that cause me to laugh out loud like the ones in this thread.

So my airing of grievances is those complaining about those complaining. Without all the beyond silly complaining about grading and AHs this place would not be near as fun to read.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

That will never happen . As I recall, these hypotheticals were raised so much in the thread that a speculative statement became read by the ML fanboys desperate to defend them for any reason as an actual fact. I still find it extremely dubious that they would be ordered, via the world's most unique insurance policies, or insurance company decisions that surely violate the actual contract that absolutely does not require this method of valuation, or the police, to host a fraudulent auction that is illegal under state law and then also would never point to that to justify their course in their announcements. We all know, very obviously, that this was not the only valid play from a legal standpoint. Running fake fraudulent auctions illegal under state law was not the only thing they could have done.

I'm not saying they were "ordered" to run the auction by the insurance company or that the contract required it. What I am saying is that I can well envision a scenario where ML discussed its predicament with its insurer, and the insurer advised that as a practical matter, it would be much easier and cleaner for all concerned if it let the auction continue to establish valuation benchmarks. And perhaps ML agreed and followed that recommendation. IMO that does not make them dishonest, nor does having that opinion make ME dishonest or a ML fanboy (I most definitely am not). I am fine if you disagree, I am not fine with you denigrating everyone who disagrees with you as dishonest, and you really don't need to go there to make your points. This is a complex situation as to which people can reasonably differ.

As for the police, I just don't know, not my area, but my opinion does not depend one way or another on that aspect.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I'm not saying they were "ordered" to run the auction by the insurance company or that the contract required it. What I am saying is that I can well envision a situation where ML discussed its predicament with its insurer, and the insurer advised that as a practical matter, it would be much easier and more pragmatic for all concerned if it let the auction continue to establish valuation benchmarks. And perhaps ML agreed and followed that recommendation. IMO that does not make them dishonest, nor does having that opinion make ME dishonest or a ML fanboy (I most definitely am not).

As for the police, I just don't know, not my area, but my opinion does not depend one way or another on that aspect.

I replied to Parkplace, regarding a source claim from Ohio, not you. If you go back to the thread, you will see the argument I alleged in there made numerous times. I do not recall if you had this extra nuance at the time or not or were smart enough not to get trapped by the ridiculous insurance policy claim. Probably the later lol.

I think that lying to your customers by hosting fraudulent auctions for items they did not have and could not possibly deliver, even if you like that as the correct course, is quite obviously "dishonest". This is why it is so ridiculous and gear grinding - even this has to be denied and we have to pretend that that isn't dishonest. That is absurd, and dishonest itself. Where I implied dishonesty from you was your claim that you couldn't even understand the grievance - while knowing full well why it is wrong for people who are not Memory Lane to do the exact same thing. Of course you get it, you just disagree with it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I replied to Parkplace, regarding a source claim from Ohio, not you. If you go back to the thread, you will see the argument I alleged in there made numerous times. I do not recall if you had this extra nuance at the time or not or were smart enough not to get trapped by the ridiculous insurance policy claim. Probably the later lol.

I think that lying to your customers by hosting fraudulent auctions for items they did not have and could not possibly deliver, even if you like that as the correct course, is quite obviously "dishonest". This is why it is so ridiculous and gear grinding - even this has to be denied and we have to pretend that that isn't dishonest. That is absurd, and dishonest itself. Where I implied dishonesty from you was your claim that you couldn't even understand the grievance - while knowing full well why it is wrong for people who are not Memory Lane to do the exact same thing. Of course you get it, you just disagree with it.

I do think it's quite plausible the insurer recommended and stated a preference for continuing the auction. I don't think it was required by the policy or that the insurer "ordered" them to do it. And again, I think there are significant differences between a single BST seller committing intentional fraud and this very complex situation that make it a poor analogy. And your argument has become circular -- it's dishonest to host a fraudulent auction.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I would love love to get confirmation on this statement. The insurance company maybe, but I am pretty sure the police did not weigh in on this.

C'mon. Who are you to doubt the honesty of a company selling product they don't have?

[JollyElm]

Two grievances...

WAR and Peace

1. Never in my life has anyone tried to convince me of something or tried to prove they were right by trotting out the theoretical stat of WAR.
I have played baseball and softball my entire life with people who love the game. The number of conversations we've had based on the theoretical stat of WAR?
ZERO!!!!!
Yet, every single thread here immediately (and endlessly) turns into "My theoretical stat of WAR beats your theoretical stat of WAR!!!" by people who seemingly have never dug into the batter's box even once in their lives.
I'll take the 'dirt' guys' opinions about players (especially the ones whose careers we witnessed first hand) over the computer screen 'data' guys any day of the week, because the knowledge of the f*cking game is in their very souls, and not just something read off of their phones.

Stop suckling on the teet of the almighty WAR mother, and come up with something else once in awhile!!!!!!!


2. Lately, it seems that there are more and more new-ish members who constantly flood the board (Collectorism: "Board Swarmers") daily with arguments and BS aplenty.
It's constant!!!!
Seeing their avatar, your only thought is, "Okay, who is this a-hole quoting and snarkily going after now???!!!"

(As you're reading this, I'm sure member names and avatars immediately raced to the forefront of your brain, amirite??)

It'd be nice if those folks would just STFU and help return the site to a more peaceful (with normal bitching/complaining/arguing levels) environment.


And using HAR (holidays above replacement), it's probably best (due undoubtedly to the vast majority of members celebrating this particular holiday) that I wish everyone a Merry Christmas!!!
But, to not f*cking rely solely on HAR, I will also say Happy (my preferred spelling) Chanukah!!


And to all, a good end of grievances...

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Two grievances...

WAR and Peace

1. Never in my life has anyone tried to convince me of something or tried to prove they were right by trotting out the theoretical stat of WAR.
I have played baseball and softball my entire life with people who love the game. The number of conversations we've had based on the theoretical stat of WAR?
ZERO!!!!!
Yet, every single thread here immediately (and endlessly) turns into "My theoretical stat of WAR beats your theoretical stat of WAR!!!" by people who seemingly have never dug into the batter's box even once in their lives.
I'll take the 'dirt' guys' opinions about players (especially the ones whose careers we witnessed first hand) over the computer screen 'data' guys any day of the week, because the knowledge of the f*cking game is in their very souls, and not just something read off of their phones.

Stop suckling on the teet of the almighty WAR mother, and come up with something else once in awhile!!!!!!!


2. Lately, it seems that there are more and more new-ish members who constantly flood the board (Collectorism: "Board Swarmers") daily with arguments and BS aplenty.
It's constant!!!!
Seeing their avatar, your only thought is, "Okay, who is this a-hole quoting and snarkily going after now???!!!"

(As you're reading this, I'm sure member names and avatars immediately raced to the forefront of your brain, amirite??)

It'd be nice if those folks would just STFU and help return the site to a more peaceful (with normal bitching/complaining/arguing levels) environment.


And using HAR (holidays above replacement), it's probably best (due undoubtedly to the vast majority of members celebrating this particular holiday) that I wish everyone a Merry Christmas!!!
But, to not f*cking rely solely on HAR, I will also say Happy (my preferred spelling) Chanukah!!


And to all, a good end of grievances...

Happy Holidays, my friend. In addition to always just cracking me up, your posts are a very bright spot in a sometimes bleak world when I take it all into consideration.

I hope your 2025 is everything you ever dreamed about, and that everything you could ever imagine on your card wantlist happens. Cheers!

[raulus]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

It'd be nice if those folks would just STFU and help return the site to a more peaceful (with normal bitching/complaining/arguing levels) environment.


And using HAR (holidays above replacement), it's probably best (due undoubtedly to the vast majority of members celebrating this particular holiday) that I wish everyone a Merry Christmas!!!
But, to not f*cking rely solely on HAR, I will also say Happy (my preferred spelling) Chanukah!!


And to all, a good end of grievances...

Reminds me of my new favorite quote, from the President of Argentina:

"Long live freedom, damn it!"

[jingram058]

WAR is total BS.

Card grading is total BS.

Know it alls, in fact, don't know it all.

Now we can get back to it being a hobby.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I would love love to get confirmation on this statement. The insurance company maybe, but I am pretty sure the police did not weigh in on this.

According to the SCD article you posted to the Memory Lane thread, ML states that the Strongville police asked ML not to publicly confirm the theft while their investigation was ongoing. There is some nuance to that statement, but it seems to me that the police were encouraging ML to keep the auction going, or at least preferred that it continue.

This information was communicated by ML, sure, but assuming it is true, it does show that ML was working with their insurers and the police while the auction was ongoing. I really don't see how their actions can be fraudulent if they are working with the police.



Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

According to the SCD article you posted to the Memory Lane thread, ML states that the Strongville police asked ML not to publicly confirm the theft while their investigation was ongoing. There is some nuance to that statement, but it seems to me that the police were encouraging ML to keep the auction going, or at least preferred that it continue.

This information was communicated by ML, sure, but assuming it is true, it does show that ML was working with their insurers and the police while the auction was ongoing. I really don't see how their actions can be fraudulent if they are working with the police.

Why would anyone take the owner of Memory Lane at his word for anything? The guy literally spent years in prison for being a con artist. LOL

[brianp-beme]

My grievance is that for some, Festivus is celebrated all year.

Instead, Happy Holidays and have a great New Year.


Brian

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Why would anyone take the owner of Memory Lane at his word for anything? The guy literally spent years in prison for being a con artist. LOL

I hear you. If the Strongville police says something different, I would believe them over ML. Or if one of the consignee or buyers of the stolen cards contradicts ML then I would give them weight.

But I haven't heard anyone with knowledge of the facts that is disputing either the letter that ML sent out, or SCD's reporting.



Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

I hear you. If the Strongville police says something different, I would believe them over ML. Or if one of the consignee or buyers of the stolen cards contradicts ML then I would give them weight.

But I haven't heard anyone with knowledge of the facts that is disputing either the letter that ML sent out, or SCD's reporting.



Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Back after a nice holiday vacation. And this post is now on page 2

I am assuming we will see some of the buyers post their wins right? The cards were sent back to memory lane recently.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

There is a reason both the police and the insurance company said to run the auction. There are a lot of legal rights at play here from many different parties. Running the auction and sorting out the fallout in court later was the only valid play from a legal standpoint.

I find the idea that a guy from Ohio with the word "lawyer" in his screen name would believe a story about how an insurance company and "the police" both served as legal counsel to an auction house with an important legal decision to make to be quite funny.