Everyone's favorite auction house

[pokerplyr80]

Does intent matter when it comes to the alteration of a baseball card? And can you determine intent simply because the attempt was not completely successful. This card raises some interesting questions:

http://loveofthegameauctions.com/190...-LOT19205.aspx

Especially considering their pledge to pull any card that has been determined to be altered. Perhaps they meant only if a before scan is available.

It also looks like their rule does not apply to memorabilia.

This is a current listing that's been cleaned up:

http://loveofthegameauctions.com/Exc...-LOT19069.aspx

This is what it looked like before:

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=56621

[rhettyeakley]

What exactly would you have Al do the day before the auction ends? He states he contacted all bidders when he found out and has in large Red writing in the description that they found some new info. It really makes things tough when it is the day before the auction ends.

Some still may not see the updates and I'm sure Al will check with the winner and cancel if they don't want the card after the auction to make sure they aren't upset.

Much different than what Brent tried to do by hiding the T3 Cobb update in the fine print of the auction in my opinion. Also, find several thousand more examples and maybe you could be on to something... but you are probably right Al is probably just as immoral as Brent, that is what you are trying to imply, right?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

What exactly would you have Al do the day before the auction ends? He states he contacted all bidders when he found out and has in large Red writing in the description that they found some new info. It really makes things tough when it is the day before the auction ends.

Some still may not see the updates and I'm sure Al will check with the winner and cancel if they don't want the card after the auction to make sure they aren't upset.

Much different than what Brent tried to do by hiding the T3 Cobb update in the fine print of the auction in my opinion. Also, find several thousand more examples and maybe you could be on to something... but you are probably right Al is probably just as immoral as Brent, that is what you are trying to imply, right?

I would expect them to do what they said they would do. This is copied and pasted from their earlier statement:

It has long been our belief that any process designed to disguise or remove wear or degradation that has happened to a card should be called what it is: an alteration. We understand that some alterations are considered acceptable by many hobbyists, and that some alterations are virtually undetectable. However, we still consider them alterations.

Should any hobbyist discover compelling evidence that a card in our auction has been altered, we will withdraw the card immediately.

While we can never eliminate 100% of undisclosed alterations, and would never pledge to be able to catch them all or be mistake-free, we can establish procedures that help us identify and remove such items from our auction.


Both of these listings seem to contradict their own statement, although the second listing is not a card.

I am actually curious to see what the reaction will be around here now that it's LOTG and not PWCC.

[Steve D]

The thing is, with that tin sign, I suppose you could do the same thing by just putting it outside during a hard rainstorm, letting the rain clean it off.

Steve

[drcy]

The tin sign is a different situation than a card. Apples to oranges. Graded trading cards are a unique genre, where they are professionally graded and entombed, and minuscule differences in condition (idiotically) greatly affect value. The whole area of graded grading cards has separated itself from other collectibles (and sometimes common sense). The whole recent scandal these days with trading cards is alterations undetected by graders and not being reflected in the label's grade. Tin signs aren't professionally graded and entombed, and obviously, this one hasn't been, so there's no 'cognitive dischord' between the sign and the grade on the label (as there is no label) . . . It's no minor detail that LOTG's text is specified for trading cards,and the tin sign would better be compared to a raw card.

The cleaning of the tin sign has been disclosed and that answers that . . . As a side issue, I don't believe removing grime and dirt from a tine sign is detrimental. In fact, some would say the opposite. Though I don't know what exactly was done. Though, as I just said, disclosure is important.

I don't know how the alteration of the card was included (or not) in the grade-- perhaps it was . . . I don't know, and admit I'm not up to date with the details of grading, but do know that erasure marks and pencil marks are often part of the grade. So no opinion at the moment on that card . . . . . . Though the quoted rule should have noted that it's about alterations that are not reflected in the grade.

[timn1]

Thank you for clarifying the situation with actual knowledge.

Tim

Ps. Am I am the only one getting really weary of all the self appointed moral arbiters hovering around every hobby event?

Tim

Originally Posted by drcy

The tin sign is a different situation than a card. Apples to oranges. Graded trading cards are a unique genre, where they are professionally graded and entombed, and minuscule differences in condition (idiotically) greatly affect value. The whole area of graded grading cards has separated itself from other collectibles (and sometimes common sense). The whole recent scandal these days with trading cards is alterations undetected by graders and not being reflected in the label's grade. Tin signs aren't professionally graded and entombed, and obviously, this one hasn't been, so there's no 'cognitive dischord' between the sign and the grade on the label (as there is no label) . . . It's no minor detail that LOTG's text is specified for trading cards,and the tin sign would better be compared to a raw card.

The cleaning of the tin sign has been disclosed and that answers that . . . As a side issue, I don't believe removing grime and dirt from a tine sign is detrimental. In fact, some would say the opposite. Though I don't know what exactly was done. Though, as I just said, disclosure is important.

I don't know how the alteration of the card was included (or not) in the grade-- perhaps it was . . . I don't know, and admit I'm not up to do date with the details of grading, but do know that erasure marks and pencil marks are often part of the grade. So no opinion at the moment on that card . . . . . . Though quoted rule should have noted that it's about alterations that are not reflected in the grade.

[Al C.risafulli]

Hi Jesse:

Allow me to address your concerns.

1) I spoke with the Reach sign consignor on Thursday night and was advised the sign had been cleaned with distilled water. Given the sign is a non-porous, tin sign, I do not consider that to be any more an alteration than, say, cleaning ashes out of the ashtray in Lot 98 (which was probably also done at some point). Despite this, on Friday I reached out to every bidder on the lot by phone, explained the situation, and gave each the opportunity to cancel their bids. None took me up on the offer. After I had spoken with each bidder, I added the notation to the description so that any potential new bidder could also see it. With an hour to go in extended bidding, there have been, thus far, no new bidders.

2) The E95 Cobb issue was pointed out to me overnight last night. This morning I inspected the card, and decided that the appropriate course of action in this case was to send out an errata email to all the bidders on the card, advise them of the situation, and give each of them the opportunity to cancel their bids. One did. I also wrote an addendum to the description to alert additional potential bidders.

Your attempt to draw ANY correlation between my behavior and fraudulent, illegal activity on the part of other companies is exactly what it sounds like.

Warm regards,
-Al

[pokerplyr80]

So why do you think it's debatable that an attempt to remove a stain was done deceptively? And why is that even relevant to whether or not you adhere to your own policy?

I haven't accused any one of fraudulent activity, and don't believe there is necessarily anything wrong with some of the outed cards that have simply been cleaned up a little.

But it does seem disingenuous in my opinion to put out a statement saying if you discover a card in your auction has been altered you will pull it immediately, only to leave one that has been up in your next auction.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I am actually curious to see what the reaction will be around here now that it's LOTG and not PWCC.

I am sure it is going to be very different as Al hasn't been shown to be involved in selling "hundreds" of altered cards and possible shill bids over the past few years and doesn't have the absolutely horrible reputation that Brent now enjoys.

Also, again, it is the day of the auction ending! I personally think the card should be ended but that is my opinion and I am sure Al would let the high bidder out if they didn't see the addendum that is not hidden (red lettering w/ yellow background).

Also, the sign is a very different situation as cleaning a large sign is pretty much normal in that hobby. Why wouldn't you clean with simple water something like that?

[swarmee]

PLEASE NOTE: It was pointed out to us that this sign closely resembles a dirtier example of the sign that was recently sold at auction. In discussing this with our consignor, we were advised that this sign was cleaned with cotton balls and distilled water. While this type of cleaning is typical with non-porous items of this nature, in an effort to be consistent with our policy regarding restoration, we have communicated this with our bidders and are amending our description accordingly.

This is the disclaimer in the text of the auction, which you have to scroll down to the bottom of the listing to read. Not sure if it was there when you posted 20 minutes ago.

[martyp]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

It also looks like their rule does not apply to memorabilia.

This is a current listing that's been cleaned up:

http://loveofthegameauctions.com/Exc...-LOT19069.aspx

This is what it looked like before:

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=56621

Is it your thinking that someone purchased this sign from REA and then cleaned and consigned the exact same sign to LOTG for an auction ending one week later? That does not show any logic on your part IMO. The only way that this could happen is REA never had the sign in their possession and was consigned to more than one auction. Are you implying that REA is selling something that they do not have in their office? It would also seem that you must believe that REA did not plan on shipping this sign out since they did not have it.

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by martyp

Is it your thinking that someone purchased this sign from REA and then cleaned and consigned the exact same sign to LOTG for an auction ending one week later? That does not show any logic on your part IMO. The only way that this could happen is REA never had the sign in their possession and was consigned to more than one auction. Are you implying that REA is selling something that they do not have in their office? It would also seem that you must believe that REA did not plan on shipping this sign out since they did not have it.

REA sold the sign in the spring not a week ago.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am reluctant to post this because it feels in the spirit of no good deed goes unpunished. In normal circumstances I would have found Al's disclosure and notification commendable. That said, in my opinion, he should instead have taken the auction down. He made a bold and unequivocal statement that he would remove any card identified as altered from his auction, yet a card was identified as altered and he didn't remove it. I understand why he didn't, and of course it's easy to pass judgment from a distance, and I continue to hold him in high regard. But I think he should have followed his own policy and not tried to finesse it. Just my opinion.

[Orioles1954]

Skip it.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Skip it.

Ha. I too have drafted and deleted numerous posts, each time deciding it’s just not worth getting into. Bottom line for me, Al is one of the good guys and LOTG is a top-notch outfit.

Ryan Hotchkiss

[iowadoc77]

The consistency of the complainfest in this hobby is staggering. I love cards. I love talking cards. I love buying cards but threads like this sour the hobby in my opinion.
I should have known better than to open it in the first place. There are a ton of people on this message board and many have really strong opinions. There was no win in this situation. Because no matter what is done some will disagree. That’s life. This is cardboard and tin.
This guy, for one, is sick of all the complaining FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLAINING.
I just want the hobby. And intelligent discussions about it.
Next time I will know better than to open a thread that I know obviously where it is going.
Eric Recker. Just in case that is needed.

Edited to add- Al is one of the best in the hobby. I am thankful for him and his integrity. That is specifically for the op. Al is good stuff. Sorry if you disagree but the evidence is not on your side.

[Snapolit1]

One person’s complaining is another person identifying an issue they care about.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by iowadoc77

The consistency of the complainfest in this hobby is staggering. I love cards. I love talking cards. I love buying cards but threads like this sour the hobby in my opinion.
I should have known better than to open it in the first place. There are a ton of people on this message board and many have really strong opinions. There was no win in this situation. Because no matter what is done some will disagree. That’s life. This is cardboard and tin.
This guy, for one, is sick of all the complaining FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLAINING.
I just want the hobby. And intelligent discussions about it.
Next time I will know better than to open a thread that I know obviously where it is going.
Eric Recker. Just in case that is needed.

Edited to add- Al is one of the best in the hobby. I am thankful for him and his integrity. That is specifically for the op. Al is good stuff. Sorry if you disagree but the evidence is not on your side.

I hate cards. I hate the hobby. I'm in to the hilt and the MAJORITY are scam artists. The intelligent discussions are on BO, where they show you exactly how it is being done . It is a huge syndicate and EVERYONE IS INVOLVED, IMHO. The have ruined the hobby. PERIOD

This is what hobbyists should be discussing , not their stupid collections...that they LOOOOOOOVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[ValKehl]

With respect to the E95 Cobb card, while Al did not take the course of action stated on his LOTG web site (pull this card from the auction), I feel that Al took an even more appropriate course of action under the circumstances. I know that if I were one of the bidders on the Cobb card, I would have been much more pleased with the action Al took, instead of ending the auction for this card.

FWIW, LOTG is one of the very few auction houses that I will leave a maximum bid with. Last night, shortly after midnight, I put in a bid on a pricey (for me) card and became the high bidder. Being an old fart who no longer has the stamina to stay awake all night, I put in a max bid a couple of bidding increments higher and went to bed. BTW, I might be wrong, but I think the owner/consignor of this card was Al himself (from his collection); this thought did not give me any qualms about leaving a max bid. When I awoke this morning, I happily saw that I won this card and that my max bid was unnecessary.

[martyp]

Originally Posted by RedsFan1941

REA sold the sign in the spring not a week ago.

This is from the link provided. What am I missing?
Start: 7/26/2019 12:15 PM EST
End: 8/18/2019 6:00 PM EST

[frankbmd]

A shout out to REA

At least they didn’t clean (alter???) it, before they sold it.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

A shout out to REA. At least they didn’t clean (alter???) it, before they sold it.

This is tongue-in-cheek, I assume, unless I missed the memo that says it's become not OK to clean stuff. I'm a memorabilia guy, and anybody is welcome to clean things before they sell them to me, other than game-used, of course. Lots of different kinds of "cleaning" are well accepted on the card side, right? We are talking about actual cleaning here, getting dirt and other foreign substances off?

[drcy]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

A shout out to REA

At least they didn’t clean (alter???) it, before they sold it.

In fact, I heard they added some more dirt to it just to be even more honest.

(That too was tongue in cheek)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by martyp

This is from the link provided. What am I missing?
Start: 7/26/2019 12:15 PM EST
End: 8/18/2019 6:00 PM EST

Look below, it's from the spring auction.

[prestigecollectibles]

Originally Posted by martyp

This is from the link provided. What am I missing?
Start: 7/26/2019 12:15 PM EST
End: 8/18/2019 6:00 PM EST

You're not looking in the correct spot

[martyp]

Originally Posted by prestigecollectibles

You're not looking in the correct spot

Thank you. I just did a quick look and saw the Summer auction dates in the top left and took it to be for the sign.

[Gradedcardman]

Who wouldn’t clean the sign ? If it was simply dust and dirt from years of storage or sitting in a barn would most of us not clean it ? Amazing how judgmental we all become when hiding behind a keyboard.

If this hobby is too much for you then get out. Find a hobby with no issues and please share. Especially if it involves collecting.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The answer to your first question is apparently the original consignor to REA.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The answer to your first question is apparently the original consignor to REA.

Am I a bad person if I laughed at this? I went to a Van Gogh exhibit last month and all of the paintings were mint in matching frames. I don't know either. Rob

[MVSNYC]

I rarely post in these type of threads.

On the E95 Cobb, you can clearly see something was erased (it's not trying to be hidden, or deceitful, there's an obvious erasure there). What's also obvious to me, and many others, is that SGC took this into consideration when grading the card. If it did not have that erasure, the card would've safely been a 4-5.

Al (LOTG) is top notch, honest with great integrity. Period.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

I rarely post in these type of threads.

On the E95 Cobb, you can clearly see something was erased (it's not trying to be hidden, or deceitful, there's an obvious erasure there). What's also obvious to me, and many others, is that SGC took this into consideration when grading the card. If it did not have that erasure, the card would've safely been a 4-5.

Al (LOTG) is top notch, honest with great integrity. Period.

The problem, though, is that this "obvious" erasure was not mentioned in Al's original description, much less as accounting for the grade. I am sure it was just an oversight but I think it led to there being an issue.

"Well-centered from left to right, ever so slightly low on the canvas, the card exhibits wear consistent with the VG 3 grade, mostly at the corners. The reverse is clean, with very slight surface dirt almost too light to mention."

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

I rarely post in these type of threads.

On the E95 Cobb, you can clearly see something was erased (it's not trying to be hidden, or deceitful, there's an obvious erasure there). What's also obvious to me, and many others, is that SGC took this into consideration when grading the card. If it did not have that erasure, the card would've safely been a 4-5.

.

Thats horseshit, they won't grade a card with and MK or erasure higher than a 1.5.

[ullmandds]

i have no opinion on the sign...but that cobb is obviously mis-graded.

[Cozumeleno]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Thats horseshit, they won't grade a card with and MK or erasure higher than a 1.5.

That might be close but not entirely true. They graded my Ragan T207 a 2 despite a large pencil mark on the back. Older flip, though, so perhaps their standards have changed.

[Republicaninmass]

Highest grade per the website

GRADE

2

QUALITY

GOOD

DESCRIPTION

Centered 90/10 or better. This card usually exhibits one or more of these characteristics: heavy print spots, heavy crease(s), pinhole(s), color or focus imperfections or discoloration, surface scuffing or tear, rounded and/or fraying corners, ink or pencil marking(s), and lack of all or some original gloss.

[frankbmd]

I just went out and tried to get rid of some rust on the undercarriage of my Wisconsin born Honda with several dozen cotton balls and distilled water.

Do you want to speculate on the results?

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I just went out and tried to get rid of some rust on the undercarriage of my Wisconsin born Honda with several dozen cotton balls and distilled water.

Do you want to speculate on the results?

Your cotton balls are no longer white.

Brian

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I just went out and tried to get rid of some rust on the undercarriage of my Wisconsin born Honda with several dozen cotton balls and distilled water.

Do you want to speculate on the results?

Back story.

Several years ago I sold a 2003 Toyota to an exporter of used cars. I disclosed that the transmission had a potentially serious problem. He didn’t care. All he was interested in, while negotiating a purchase price, was how rusty the undercarriage was.

He paid in cash above book and shipped the car to France.

And “Yes, Brian” my cotton balls took a beating.

[rhettyeakley]

I also think the erasure on the Cobb would result in a grade lower than what it was graded and to be honest I would have preferred that it had been pulled but the fact that it was pointed out the day before the auction ended was a difficult situation to be put in. It was handled a bit clumsy perhaps but I have no doubt Al wouldn’t have had an issue if the winner had missed it and didn’t want to go through with the sale, this is based on his track record of being honest and wanting to do right so he gets the benefit of the doubt. This benefit of the doubt is not afforded to those that have been actively consorting with known card doctors and have seriously questionable morals due to an overwhelming mountain of evidence.

The graders missed the erasure, so did Al. It was a singular mistake and he tried his best to make it right. This whole thread is ridiculousness. Jesse has a strange vendetta and it is obvious, he is trying to condone his own past bad behavior with PWCC by pointing out something that in his mind made himself look better... most everybody saw right through it.

Enough about the sign already, after the cleaning it has much better eye appeal.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I also think the erasure on the Cobb would result in a grade lower than what it was graded and to be honest I would have preferred that it had been pulled but the fact that it was pointed out the day before the auction ended was a difficult situation to be put in. It was handled a bit clumsy perhaps but I have no doubt Al wouldn’t have had an issue if the winner had missed it and didn’t want to go through with the sale, this is based on his track record of being honest and wanting to do right so he gets the benefit of the doubt. This benefit of the doubt is not afforded to those that have been actively consorting with known card doctors and have seriously questionable morals due to an overwhelming mountain of evidence.

The graders missed the erasure, so did Al. It was a singular mistake and he tried his best to make it right. This whole thread is ridiculousness. Jesse has a strange vendetta and it is obvious, he is trying to condone his own past bad behavior with PWCC by pointing out something that in his mind made himself look better... most everybody saw right through it.

Enough about the sign already, after the cleaning it has much better eye appeal.

Very true. Discovering an error on the last day of an auction is very difficult to fix. It usually requires phone calls to the high bidder, under bidders and consignor. It very seldom is pleasant and based on everyone’s input and severity of the error a tough decision is made.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Enough about the sign already, after the cleaning it has much better eye appeal.

Except that I'm still interested in whether people think the result of the "cleaning" as it looks in the photos is reasonable or even possible, especially those who have a lot of experience collecting and/or dealing in metal items. Is this a common practice with those, and this a common result?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I also think the erasure on the Cobb would result in a grade lower than what it was graded and to be honest I would have preferred that it had been pulled but the fact that it was pointed out the day before the auction ended was a difficult situation to be put in. It was handled a bit clumsy perhaps but I have no doubt Al wouldn’t have had an issue if the winner had missed it and didn’t want to go through with the sale, this is based on his track record of being honest and wanting to do right so he gets the benefit of the doubt. This benefit of the doubt is not afforded to those that have been actively consorting with known card doctors and have seriously questionable morals due to an overwhelming mountain of evidence.

The graders missed the erasure, so did Al. It was a singular mistake and he tried his best to make it right. This whole thread is ridiculousness. Jesse has a strange vendetta and it is obvious, he is trying to condone his own past bad behavior with PWCC by pointing out something that in his mind made himself look better... most everybody saw right through it.

Enough about the sign already, after the cleaning it has much better eye appeal.

Believe it or not (I'm sure most of you won't) I have no grudge or vendetta against Al or LOTG. I've never met the man. I've bid on a few of their auctions but never won anything. We may have had a brief conversation when I first signed up for LOTG, I honestly Don't remember. I've gotten into it with some guy who I believe used to work with him in a few threads. I think his screen name is Bicem. Something like that.

The other LOTG threads I've spoken up in just started with me sharing my opinion on the issue. These threads are always so one sided in their favor that I find it quite ridiculous. If I have any grudge or bias, it's with the attitude on this board that they can do no wrong, and not with the AH or owner personally. I do remember one in particular when I wrote a sarcastic prediction that something would be really messed up in an upcoming auction, which would be followed by several posts about how it's no big deal because Al's such a great guy. Both came true.

I did not go looking for these issues. Someone mentioned them to me, and I was initially not going to say anything because I knew how it would look given the timing and similarity between the alterations on the E95 Cobb and my T3 Cobb. I'm also aware of the perception that I'm out to get Al, and that this would only add fuel to that fire. I almost didn't start this thread because of this.

I am not trying to condone or justify how I handled the T3 situation. I did my best and don't really care if you or anyone else approves.

I knew if I didn't point out these two items, no one else around here would. I felt they were worth discussing. I think it's beyond ridiculous that they put out a statement acting like they're above the current controversy and would instantly pull any altered card, only to do the opposite in the next auction. If they hadn't put out the statement, I would have no issue with the disclosure on the Cobb, other that the ridiculous justification for the decision based on the alternation not being done with the intent to deceive.

That statement in the Cobb disclosure is what pushed it over the edge for me, and what drew the PWCC comparison in my mind. Maybe the rest of you disagree. PWCC was crushed on the forums for making up the conservation definition as a distinction from other alterations. I personally believe he's right, there is a difference between cards that have been conserved, vs more egregious alterations, and that the hobby will eventually accept that definition. But that isn't relevant to this discussion.

This is copied from the LOTG disclosure:

"While our policy is to withdraw items that are discovered to be altered, in this case we believe the alteration is visible enough that it is debatable whether or not it was done deceptively."

I think that is a bunch of BS. The alteration is visible because someone did a poor job, just like on the T3 Cobb. Whoever it was that did the alteration was most likely trying to deceive either the next buyer or grader, but failed in their attempt to remove whatever was there without a trace.

I haven't seen anyone else even mention this, so perhaps I'm the only one who cares. But I have a hard time believing anyone could think a stain or mark wasn't removed from the Cobb deceptively. There should be no debate.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Thats horseshit, they won't grade a card with and MK or erasure higher than a 1.5.

Nonsense!

The card below has a slight erasure on the back, one that I hadn't noticed despite owning the card since about 1980. I only found out about it when I asked SGC at a show why it was a 40 when I regularly see 50's with worse corners. They pointed it out pretty quickly.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

I rarely post in these type of threads.

On the E95 Cobb, you can clearly see something was erased (it's not trying to be hidden, or deceitful, there's an obvious erasure there). What's also obvious to me, and many others, is that SGC took this into consideration when grading the card. If it did not have that erasure, the card would've safely been a 4-5.

Al (LOTG) is top notch, honest with great integrity. Period.

This.

[mq711]

The rule concerning conservation I think is most appropriate was previously mentioned by one of the Icons of this board: did the item go to a body shop or a car wash.

[jchcollins]

In case anybody is interested, over on the postwar boards there are still a few people who talk about baseball cards.

The prewar section of this board is like a new Stephen King novel for me - I have to put it down for a few days, but I know when I do come back the new chapter, er - thread, is going to be waiting for me, and I’ll have to read the whole thing in one sitting. As disdainful as I find many posts here, on the whole it does make for fascinating reading.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk