SCD, Coach's Corner & TS O'Connell

slidekellyslide · #1 06-08-2009, 10:26 AM

Well, if you can't delete the posts then the least you could do is comment and say you've heard from Bob L and that he is not the one that left that comment. Then you need to look into seeing if you can change your blog so people can't leave anonymous comments....they can still be anonymous, but they can't register as "Bob Lemke" without really being him...if you know what I'm saying.

Leon · #2 06-08-2009, 11:41 AM

Regardless of if you love or hate SCD, or any associated company, it is very unfair to let folks post anonymously as a person they aren't. To me that invalidates some of the blog....and is one of the main reasons (if not the main reason) I like our new board s/w so much more than the old s/w.

Mike- if I were you I would consider not letting folks post anonymously under some circumstances. I am not sure how you can control it. For me, and pertaining to Net54, we had to change s/w to get it done. You might look at other blog s/w if yours won't do what you want. Also, when I say "anonymous" it could be similar to this board where you don't have to put your name out for the world to see but the moderator(s) have the info..At least that helps keep the comments real......best regards

Rich Klein · #3 06-08-2009, 11:51 AM

That type of anonymous posting (especially in the Max Silberman thread) is the reason TS stopped allowing ANY comments.

Having said that

1) Having Coach's Corner in SCD is hurting their business; at least we can believe it is. It is possible for every Rob Lifson who pulled out and explained to people at F&W/Krause why; there are at least 10 people who just stop with SCD and say nothing; don't give a reason and don't worry about it. I believe I have read; that is the usual ratio of people who say something to people who don't. I believe that is even accurate for this board. My last six SCD's have been about 40 or fewer pages.

2) I believe Krause should have used a slightly different schematic for their comments in blogs. Users had to register AND in the case of the Silberman blog piece; it would have been totally allowable to say; any posts off the subject will be deleted. I believe in free speech; but I also believe in courtesy and those people who posted in that thread showed no courtesy.

3) Having worked for a similar operation to Krause in hobby pubs; etc. -- I do understand their dilemma and I guarantee you that Bob; TS; etc. have no say in the matter about whether to accept CC or other people such as them. They can say (and we don't know if they do) anything they want privately; but they sure can't say publicly if they agree with those who believe CC should be banned. That is just a corporate fact; and remember Chet Krause and his employees dont own KP anymore.

Regards
Rich

Edited to include the print run information on the SCD I received today

sports-rings · #4 06-08-2009, 12:54 PM

thanks guys, I am very new to this. My site was designed a while back regarding rings. I was so outraged that O'Connell & SCD stopped allowing us to comment that I felt I had to do something.

This morning I received a really ugly & imature comment. You know the kind, about the size of my private parts and what I do with them. So, with that motivation, i figured out, yes I can delete some comments.

The only other issue I have is I have seen people pose as O'Connell before and he does claim he never wrote to me. However, if you read his comments in my first blog, the person writing to me sure has a similar writing style as O'Connell. You know what I mean, huge words that you would never use in a "normal, everyday" sentence. I truly believe it was him.

How about If he or Bob calls me and I verify that it is truly them, and they request I delete comments that they did not make, I will do that.

Is that fair?

Also, I will look into the option to set people up to post. I really appreciate your help, insights and patience as I learn about the world of blogging.

Please, try to visit the site, I really want to make sure it becomes a voice of our hobby in relation to the garbage that CC plays and how readers and others in the hobby feel about the role SCD plays.

thanks!

Mike the ring guy.

slidekellyslide · #5 06-08-2009, 01:56 PM

Mike, all of that sounds good. The internets (tm) are a virtual Wild West and without verification you don't know who's who. Good luck with the blog...it is needed.

tinkereversandme · #6 06-08-2009, 01:57 PM

Periodicals and those who work for them should not make excuses. There is no dilemma of you want to be an honest operation. We would never be where we are now if an important decision was made years ago. If you are saying that allowing a company that you know to be "fraudulent" is a decision that "has to be made" in order to survive, that is the decision because all you are doing is misleading the readership and doing something that is harming, well, everyone. Do things correctly and perhaps fold, or purchase some time and continue to accept the fate that you are doing something improper.

People are outraged, and it's like screaming at your waiter because the food is late or yelling at a K-Mart clerk because the price of something went up, we all do it. It's an outlet. Is it fair to scream at columnists on blogs? Probably not, but it gets the point across and makes us feel better, like we are doing something...not sitting there like humps.

Also, look at how everyone involved at the publication is behaving. It's either to look the other way and ignore, get angry back or behave in a childish fashion. You would think the place is run by infants. My two cents. I personally like what the ring guy has to say on his site.

Larry

Leon · #7 06-08-2009, 02:50 PM

Mike-the-ring-guy is fine. That isn't the problem (unless you are CC or SCD)....It's the anonymous posting of comments, while impersonating someone, else that is the issue... ala "Keith Olbermann" on our old board...best regards

william_9 · #8 06-13-2009, 02:26 AM

For those of you who don't visit the card side.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=113195

sports-rings · #9 06-13-2009, 01:15 PM

I wish to Thank Tom Tresh, and his wonderful video blog for getting the message out that Coach's Corner was no good and the relationship with SCD was unacceptable.

I would like to commend and thank Sports Collector's Digest for doing the right thing and taking a stand. I realize it's easy for people like me to write and demand that you walk away from tremendous advertising revenue, and that Coach's Corner has never been convicted of anything and why should your company pass up an opportunity to accept advertising.

Without rehashing all the arguments from the last few months, I think it's great that Sports Collectors Digest took action. While a cynic might feel rejecting Coach's Corner advertising might have more to do with your new auction site and competing against them, I believe you heard our voices and listened and that some of you insiders (employees of the organization) stood up and was heard by ownership and upper management.

TS - I hope you will reconsider allowing comments on your blog again. I believe there will be much more intelligent dialogue. Two way dialogue between you and your readers would be a great thing.

Last, I just want to say my fight is not over. The owners at Coach's Corner are corrupt but not stupid. I am sure they will continue their auctions. With all the money they are saving by no longer being allowed to adverte in SCD, they can apply those funds to internet search. This means anyone who google's sports auctions or Babe Ruth autographs will find the Coach's Corner web site. I am sure their auctions will continue and I will do everything I can to alert people that their products are garbage.

Please continue to visit my site, www.sports-rings.com and click on the blog on the right and please contribute with your comments.

Hopefully SCD and TS O'Connell will join the fight too.

Thanks Everyone!

Mike the ring guy.