During that discussion, Steve Borock and some of the members came up with the concept of a "review board". Some suggested that the review board only look at comics that happen to be discovered by a collector and which might have been sold previously with a pedigree (but whose pedigree has been lost). Others had a more expanded notion that would allow the board to examine photos of certain books to see whether they had been sold before -- but their previous numbers had been removed. This might include checking for cleaning, pressing, and (other) restoration-related alterations.
I suggested examining only high-grade books with a certain age (VF- and above from 1933-1945 and VF+ and above from 1946-1954). This suggestion was mainly due to the accurate assessment that there are a lot of high grade books from later years. Thus, it might be impossible to distinguish between two 9.6 copies of Incredible Hulk #181 -- for example.
We'd also have to retain (for group use) a photo bank consisting of such books.
Let's continue talking. What does everyone think? Steve, would the suggestion so far be tenable? How many photos/books might be involved?
Registered: 07/16/02
Posts: 23992
Loc: Newport Beach, CA, where the o...
I think what you're suggesting is a full-time job.
Red has suggested the basic structure and function of the committee. Steve has responded with ideas that would make it work for CGC.
I think we should stay within the framework established by Brad & Steve and forge ahead. Small steps are better than no steps at all.
_________________________
Wanna see vintage photos of people reading comics? Click HERE!
Currently available on DETECTIVE27.COM: Tales of Suspense #57 CGC 9.0(1st Hawkeye), America's Best Comics #1 CGC 8.5(highest graded), Batman #27 CGC 9.0, Batman #40 CGC 9.2, Strange Adventures #205 9.4, and World's Finest #2 CGC 8.0(highest graded).
WANTED: A COVERLESS ACTION 13 IN NICE SHAPE. Also, high grade copies of Action #39, 40, Adventure 267, 282, 283, Batman #11, Brave & the Bold #28, Captain America #37, Detective #69, and Superboy 93.
#1326743 - 08/19/0608:02 PMRe: The "Review Committee" discussion
[Re: nearmint]
Red HookRed Hook
Cantankerdetecti witchuntinphotoshopedness
Registered: 09/15/03
Posts: 21608
Loc: Paddling up Goon River
I agree with that. Let's just open up a few lines of communication here and see what happens. Starting with pedigree reinstatement is a good start and a worthy cause imho.
Red
_________________________
The Manufactured Gold Thread still LIVES!....HERE!
�Every act of dishonesty has at least two victims: the one we think of as the victim, and the perpetrator as well. Each little dishonesty makes another little rotten spot somewhere in the perpetrator's psyche.� - Lesley Conger
The problem with the original suggestion is that nothing happens unless someone already happens to encounter a "suspicious" book at random.
Since eBay doesn't keep an archive longer than 30 days, right now the way things would be set up, unless a book shows up on Heritage twice, kiss it goodbye.
If the objective is to seriously discover "masked" pedigree books, or to catch resubs, or any of the other things that have been mentioned here, the group can't wait until someone happens to discover something.
No, I'm not talking about a full-time job. I'm talking about a group of perhaps fifty (50) members, each with specific titles to review. Upon their review, if they discover something odd, they would ask the group at large for their collective opinion.
#1326745 - 08/19/0611:32 PMI nominate
[Re: Frank Daniels]
Ze-manZe-man I offend someone, on some level, somewhere
TOTAL NEWBIE
Registered: 01/30/04
Posts: 14497
Loc: Zionsville
After reflection..I think a little prudence would best serve us on this paticular issue. Starting small and seeing how this all unfolds is our best chance at success. As it has been brought to our attention in other threads recently .. we are not exactly batting 1000% in our attempts to implement change.
So I will say it again, lets elect those we feel will follow through and decide what is the best course of action to take in regards to slabbed books that have lost thier Pedigree moniker.
Let them come up with the guidelines, let them discuss with CGC how it will actually work. I for one am not worried about allowing those who's idea it was to run with it. Limit this council solely to restoring a lost pedigree notation and if it proves to actually be worth the time , who knows what else it will lead to.
I nominate
Redhook Nearmint Oldguy Pedigreeman
as the core council (if they accept). They can act as my/our proxy if a 60% majority votes them in. I know for a fact there are no agendas here, just a honest effort to actually do what should, needs to be done.
So what say ye...?
Also, if you cast a vote chime in with a post stating that you voted. Or make a post stating who you would rather see on the list.
_________________________
Time you enjoyed wasting is not wasted time.
Registered: 07/11/04
Posts: 6202
Loc: nor cal eastbay
Quote: Me too. I trust all of the 4 mentioned with this task.
...... DITTO!.....and yes I voted as well.
_________________________
Restoration, whether it be in comics, fine-art, coins, movie posters, vintage cars or any other form of "collectible" should be defined by the same universal standards and not be situational. No less an authority as the International Institute of Conservation (IIC) has defined resteration as "any attempt to return an object to its original form and purpose, in an attempt to recreate an earlier known state or condition". Tracey Heft Restoration Expert
#1326750 - 08/20/0607:42 AMRe: The "Review Committee" discussion
[Re: Frank Daniels]
Red HookRed Hook
Cantankerdetecti witchuntinphotoshopedness
Registered: 09/15/03
Posts: 21608
Loc: Paddling up Goon River
Quote:
No, I'm not talking about a full-time job. I'm talking about a group of perhaps fifty (50) members, each with specific titles to review. Upon their review, if they discover something odd, they would ask the group at large for their collective opinion.
The thing is, that is in essence what happens now. Anyone on the boards (far more than 50) who sees something funny out there, usally posts here about it. That wouldn't stop. I wouldn't want that to stop.
What this all means, as far as I can see.....is that instead of Steve wading through pages and pages of a thread to figure out if there is a legitimate gripe being presented.....he just waits until the "committee" formally presents CGC with a case, and then promises to examine it closer.
I don't see how this would put a clamp on the exposure of potential resubs here on the boards....we are going to do what we have always done. But....as a start....to simplify things in the case of a pedigree designation loss.....a couple of board members present the evidence to CGC, after examining it and concluding it's the real deal.....and then it's up to CGC to do something about it, and then (I assume ) issue a formal answer. I guess Steve prefers that to having to respond to dozens of posts and answering a lot of tangential questions.
In the case of resubs....I don't expect CGC to get involved at all. That area is one that I've come to realize buyers will have to watch out for themselves. Perhaps.....perhaps at some point in future....if CGC sees how well the pedigree-recovery process works....they'd get more involved in a wider range of agreements.
Understand this.....I have plenty of concerns about CGC's current business model. My involvement with the proposed pedigree committee should in no way be seen as an endorsement of other CGC business practices and policies. Replacement of lost pedigree designation does not involve a huge number of books, and in fact is a problem that only comes about as a result of the much much wider crack, enhance and resub game.
I've always tried to keep my criticism of CGC on a non-personal basis. Criticizing the CGC/Heritage business model is separate from personally criticizing the individuals who work for CGC, most of whom I've enjoyed meeting and conversing with. I don't think "getting personal" is the way to solve differences.
I think CGC knows that my allegiance is to the buyer. When Jason Ewert made a proposal to me to "pre-screen" books for him and check the databases for possible "smoking gun" books....in return for money or pedigree books....I refused. That was a pretty easy decision. Steve Borock's proposal is nothing like that one. That's why I will be happy to take part and see how it goes...a step at a time.
Red
_________________________
The Manufactured Gold Thread still LIVES!....HERE!
�Every act of dishonesty has at least two victims: the one we think of as the victim, and the perpetrator as well. Each little dishonesty makes another little rotten spot somewhere in the perpetrator's psyche.� - Lesley Conger
