It's Halloween, and threads are disappearing!

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

You sound like every schmuck who ever defended a questionable autograph.
The exact same words David, exact same.

Evidence, asshole. Evidence. I do have a James Spence CoA, you know.

And "questionable"? Not by anyone but you. And even you only hinted, 'cause you don't have the balls to come out and say anything.

[RichardSimon]

It's my opinion David and two other people I know and respect, who are known and respected on Net 54, agree with me.
And you keep digging your own grave with every post David.
I know you are certainly not in league with forgers, but you sound like one of them with every post you write.
And lets face it, if you did not get a letter from the lawyer it was an amazing coincidence that you did not contribute one post to the thread, after Leon posted the letter he got from Prisco's lawyer. You say that you had nothing else to say,,, please David, you have something to say about everythng that goes on on Net 54, you were actively posting in other threads at the time. But you totally ignore the hottest thread about the hottest topic on the board. Sure thing David,sure thing.

[David Atkatz]

More secrets! Just like Nixon's "secret plan" to end the Vietnam war.

That one worked, too. (Sarcasm smiley for Richard.)

[thetruthisoutthere]

David, if you and Richard are referring to what I think you are(NYY 1927 signed ball), then I have to agree with Richard.

I'm 100% certain that PSA would not authenticate that ball. And if you sent it back to Jimmy, I think he would reject it.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

More secrets! Just like Nixon's "secret plan" to end the Vietnam war.

That one worked, too. (Sarcasm smiley for Richard.)

If those two people give me permission to use their names I will.
Obviously David, you would violate a person' trust. I won't do that.
Not just based on this thread David, but I have read much of your writing here on 54, and read the comments that you engender from many others, but you really are a mean spirited, nasty, caustic, sarcastic and unhappy man and if I remember correctly others have said that about you in the past.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

If those two people give me permission to use their names I will.
Obviously David, you would violate a person' trust. I won't do that.
Not just based on this thread David, but I have read much of your writing here on 54, and read the comments that you engender from many others, but you really are a mean spirited, nasty, caustic, sarcastic and unhappy man and if I remember correctly others have said that about you in the past.

I am one of those two people, David.

[David Atkatz]

Well then, I apologize for calling you imaginary. But in this case, I'll take my judgement (and Jimmy's--who yes, does make mistakes) over yours and Richard's.

[RichardSimon]

I have never before posted an e mail that was sent to me. I have quoted a line or two from an e mail but I have decided to post the "sarcasm" e mail that David sent to me, so that others can see it.
Here it is, in its entirety.
Where is the sarcasm, David?

"Ypu're right, Richard. I was terrified of being sued. Not only did I stop posting, but I sent the prick and his attorney written apologies.
OK?"

The typo Ypu're is in the original David e mail, I left it in so David won't accuse me of anything underhanded.

[David Atkatz]

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, post the email where I said I'm in cahoots with Johnny F---.

I'm willing to bet that after seeing both, most board members (who, unlike you, were born with the "I understand sarcasm" gene) will understand.

[David Atkatz]

Whose trust have I violated, Richard?

And why haven't you, or your secret playmates ever emailed me about your suspicions?

Afraid I'd sue. (Sarcasm smiley; from now on, SS, for short.)

[RichardSimon]

Nobody would e mail you about the ball because they knew what your reaction would be.
"I am the great David, the ball is good, end of sentence."

[David Atkatz]

Says the great Richard, who knows it's fake, but provides nothing to back up that claim. Except imaginary playmates.

(And remember, the great James says it's good. SS)

[RichardSimon]

Here is the e mail that David asked me to post, seems rather different than the prior one that I posted.

"We? Have you teamed up with the Brusci, or does the royal we apply to you, too?
Close to home? That's right. Even though I don't know his name, I'm in cahoots to sell his forgeries. Again, Richard. Find one single item I've ever sold that was no good, or one single complaint about me, or shut the fuck up.
What have I done? Nothing. I'm not in a position to. I'm just a little ole' collector. I don't make my living proclaiming my expertise.
But I don't dish out tempting little morsels, just to show I've got the goods, and then never take it any farther.
There's a vulgar expression describing women who do that."
--
I still don't know who the Brusci is.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Whose trust have I violated, Richard?

And why haven't you, or your secret playmates ever emailed me about your suspicions?

Afraid I'd sue. (Sarcasm smiley; from now on, SS, for short.)

I did not say that there was a specific individual whose trust you violated, but you wanted me to violate the trust of two people and I assumed that was something that was common in your life, since you casually asked me to do it.

[RichardSimon]

There ya go David, that is one, and I will e mail the other one and ask him if he will go public with his opinion of that ball.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

I did not say that there was a specific individual whose trust you violated, but you wanted me to violate the trust of two people and I assumed that was something that was common in your life, since you casually asked me to do it.

You sure make a lot of assumptions, Richard.