New bannings at another coin forum.

[WoodenJefferson]

Mark communicated the whole episode to me. Since it was a private convo I'll keep it private. However, since it was a post in an open forum that got him banned I can comment on that.

 

First, it's PCGS's ball and playground and they can do whatever they want with it. That has been made abundantly clear by them. In the end they basically told Mark to go pound sand by their actions.

 

Mark made a comment in a thread that was actually a backhanded compliment in my opinion. Obviously, someone only saw in only as a backhand. Someone was not pleased.Some one issued a red card. If cooler heads were to prevail Mark would be reinstated. However, I wouldn't hold my breath. MJ

 

 

I made a post in that thread also and am surprised I didnt get the boot.

 

Mark and Greg are straight shooters. They'll be missed ATS.

 

I posted as well in the early part of that thread, I don't remember exactly what I said, but rest assured it was a comment about the lack of bell lines on that particular Franklin. It is quite possible the steam built up in that thread until something had to blow...turns out it was the OP and Mark that happened to wander in and got blow'ed up sir!

 

Edit: as in collateral damage

[Dudley the 1st]

They can always post here . I support Mark 100% and am of the mind in thinking David Hall has way to much time on his hands.

[delta]

The playground comparison is often repeated. OK, let's go with that, as the unjustified forum bannings are plainly childish. Childish bullying. The proper way of dealing with playground bullying is to stand up to the bully. Not appeasement, not excuses, not pandering, not hush-up, not bootlicking, but confrontation. It's about time the numismatic community let bullies know they can't do it without consequences.

 

Furthermore the forum isn't all their own. The PCGS forum would be practically worthless without the postings, comments, information, insights, expertise, brain-power, time and effort of the individual members. The value of the forum is almost entirely the added contributions. Otherwise, they'd have nothing but in-house announcements.

 

They can't do anything they want with that forum. For example, they can't publish people's forum comments without permission because the individuals involved have legal copyright ownership of their writings.

 

It's imperative the bullies find out their behavior is unacceptable.

[ldhair]

They own the playground and can say who gets to play there. The same is true here. I'm going to miss Mark posting there.

[19Lyds]

The real problem with the PCGS Forums is not so much that they don't allow you to complain about PCGS (which IMO folks should be able to do within reason since there are plenty of PCGS Defenders which post over there myself included) but the fact that the PCGS Executives "participate" in the forums thereby opening themselves up to DIRECT criticism. Additionally, having the President of PCGS actually MODERATE the forums is a huge mistake since its his primary duty to protect PCGS.

 

Had David Hall, Ron Guth, and Don Willis never openly participated in discussions on the PCGS forums, I think that they would not have felt DIRECT animosity toward their company and themselves.

 

Their forums should be moderated but ........ by actual moderators not Company Presidents.

 

Please, somone tell me, when was the last time that Mark Salzberg, Rick Montgomery, or David Lange posted to or moderated the NGC forums?

[robec1347]

Please, somone tell me, when was the last time that Mark Salzberg, Rick Montgomery, or David Lange posted to or moderated the NGC forums?

 

David Lange

[19Lyds]

Please, somone tell me, when was the last time that Mark Salzberg, Rick Montgomery, or David Lange posted to or moderated the NGC forums?

 

David Lange

Thank you.

[physics-fan3.14]

I haven't seen Rick Montgomery post in the memorable past, but David Lange posts with moderate frequency. Salzberg usually only posts NGC-related announcements, or responses to NGC related questions. But he is a well respected member (head) of the community.

[Frank Provasek]

In order for your light to be on, you have to be logged in. You can't be logged in if you are banned. The light will show for a while after a person is banned, but hours, not days.

 

Unless they have changed the software, a banned member can still read the forums, but as an anonymous person, not logged in as a banned member.

 

 

What is happening is that a cookie was set on Feld's computer to "keep me logged in" and the message board software just looks at that to update the "last time visited" info without checking to see if that member is on a ban list. Purging his cookies woud stop updating his visit date.

 

Designations like Full Bell Lines are often difficult to show in photos, and even

examining them in person they often seem to not be there until you get just the

right viewing angle. Then there are coins where FBL seems to mean "as full as

you are going to get on that date/mintmark"

 

I have a 53-S that SEGS graded 75% FBL, and that's probably a more realistic "good as they come" designation.

 

While it's easy to view certified coins as a "product," the collector must keep in mind that a certified coin is two components..the coin itself, and an "opinion."

 

Finally, any company that provides a product or service is not going to tolerate company bashing or promotion of competitors on their dime...nor should they. But ask any business person...you would rather have unhappy customers talking TO you at your store, or talking ABOUT you somewhere else?

[delta]

The real problem with the PCGS Forums is not so much that they don't allow you to complain about PCGS (which IMO folks should be able to do within reason since there are plenty of PCGS Defenders which post over there myself included) but the fact that the PCGS Executives "participate" in the forums thereby opening themselves up to DIRECT criticism. Additionally, having the President of PCGS actually MODERATE the forums is a huge mistake since its his primary duty to protect PCGS. Their forums should be moderated but ........ by actual moderators not Company Presidents.

 

That's a fine suggestion. The moderator should be a reliable level-headed member of the forum community. (I believe that PCGS already has someone like that moderating their equivalent of the Marketplace section). The current situation with unqualified business executives handling things with arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace to the numismatic community and is intolerable.

[ldhair]

The real problem with the PCGS Forums is not so much that they don't allow you to complain about PCGS (which IMO folks should be able to do within reason since there are plenty of PCGS Defenders which post over there myself included) but the fact that the PCGS Executives "participate" in the forums thereby opening themselves up to DIRECT criticism. Additionally, having the President of PCGS actually MODERATE the forums is a huge mistake since its his primary duty to protect PCGS. Their forums should be moderated but ........ by actual moderators not Company Presidents.

 

That's a fine suggestion. The moderator should be a reliable level-headed member of the forum community. (I believe that PCGS already has someone like that moderating their equivalent of the Marketplace section). The current situation with unqualified business executives handling things with arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace to the numismatic community and is intolerable.

Do you know a guy named grade it?

[PerryHall]

Wow!!! 100 posts on this topic. We all need to get a life.

[ModCrewman-migration]

That's a fine suggestion. The moderator should be a reliable level-headed member of the forum community. (I believe that PCGS already has someone like that moderating their equivalent of the Marketplace section). The current situation with unqualified business executives handling things with arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace to the numismatic community and is intolerable.

I've been a regular poster ATS for a couple years, and came over here to see what Feld was up to. I appreciate your opening the discussion here deltiologist; but as has been stated by others here. You CLEARLY have an axe to grind with PCGS and there has not been a hint of objectivity in any of your posts in this thread. IMHO you need to drop it. The inflammatory statements in your quote above "unqualified business executives...arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace...intolerable" do not help your case, whatever that case might be.

 

 

[Buffalo Head]

Wow!!! 100 posts on this topic. We all need to get a life.

 

Yes I agree, This is way overboard in my opinion and sometimes members get banned for crossing the line, and I understand this and so should everyone else. Just my opinion of course. This is , or was a place for us all to exchange views on coins, not politics or bashing someone else just because they don't agree with your personal opinion is wrong, yes? I think we should just move on.....Joe

[Frank Provasek]

The PCGS forum would be practically worthless without the postings, comments, information, insights, expertise, brain-power, time and effort of the individual members. The value of the forum is almost entirely the added contributions. Otherwise, they'd have nothing but in-house announcements.

 

They can't do anything they want with that forum. For example, they can't publish people's forum comments without permission because the individuals involved have legal copyright ownership of their writings.

 

 

Not so, from their terms of use:

 

...by submitting messages, information, data, text, files, links, artwork, photographs, software, or other materials ("Materials") to any of these Forums, you automatically grant (or warrant that the owner of such Materials has expressly granted) us the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, take excerpts from, incorporate into other works, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such Materials (in whole or part), in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed.

 

 

[ksteelheader]

Wow!!! 100 posts on this topic. We all need to get a life.

 

Yes I agree, This is way overboard in my opinion and sometimes members get banned for crossing the line, and I understand this and so should everyone else. Just my opinion of course. This is , or was a place for us all to exchange views on coins, not politics or bashing someone else just because they don't agree with your personal opinion is wrong, yes? I think we should just move on.....Joe

 

Don't like the subject of a thread?

 

Don't open it.

 

That's the view from here.

[delta]

Thanks much for pointing that out. For the most part it's moot, because 99++% of all postings are just off the cuff remarks, but there might be a few prospective authors whose posts were meant to be paragraphs in future publications. Eric Jordan for one. Hopefully those persons are aware of those terms.

 

 

The PCGS forum would be practically worthless without the postings, comments, information, insights, expertise, brain-power, time and effort of the individual members. The value of the forum is almost entirely the added contributions. Otherwise, they'd have nothing but in-house announcements.

 

They can't do anything they want with that forum. For example, they can't publish people's forum comments without permission because the individuals involved have legal copyright ownership of their writings.

 

 

Not so, from their terms of use:

 

...by submitting messages, information, data, text, files, links, artwork, photographs, software, or other materials ("Materials") to any of these Forums, you automatically grant (or warrant that the owner of such Materials has expressly granted) us the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, take excerpts from, incorporate into other works, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such Materials (in whole or part), in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed.

 

[delta]

It's incorrect that I've any axe to grind with PCGS, as previously stated. My motive was to not allow this issue to slide. The discussion of it was quashed ATS, and it wasn't being pursued elsewhere, despite being in my opinion a shameful outrage. My use of the word unqualified referred to being a moderator. As for having no hint of objectivity, out of self-defense I think I've been genuinely objective, due to having no personal stake, and I'm not intimidated and don't seek to curry favor with anyone in position of power. I'm in strong support of freedom of expression when it comes to legitimate numismatic topics, and therefore against unjustified capricious bannings.

 

There were indeed opposing opinions, a few expressed in the thread deleted ATS, where most messages supported Mark and Greg. One guy wrote he thought Mark's posts were irksome, with the implication the banning was okay with him. Another guy said Mark was on probation for a previous banning and may have violated the terms of his probation. A third guy posted that Mark was probably banned for other reasons that we don't know about, and PCGS should be given the benefit of the doubt. Those opinions are counter to freedom of numismatic expression, and in Mark's banning it was moreover a clear case of misreading his comment. I reiterate it was a disgrace to numismatics.

 

Maybe the silencing of the FBL discussion ATS will at least stimulate more appreciation of Franklin half dollars.

 

 

That's a fine suggestion. The moderator should be a reliable level-headed member of the forum community. (I believe that PCGS already has someone like that moderating their equivalent of the Marketplace section). The current situation with unqualified business executives handling things with arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace to the numismatic community and is intolerable.

I've been a regular poster ATS for a couple years, and came over here to see what Feld was up to. I appreciate your opening the discussion here deltiologist; but as has been stated by others here. You CLEARLY have an axe to grind with PCGS and there has not been a hint of objectivity in any of your posts in this thread. IMHO you need to drop it. The inflammatory statements in your quote above "unqualified business executives...arbitrary and vindictive excommunications is a disgrace...intolerable" do not help your case, whatever that case might be.

 

[lcoopie]

Does Greg post over here?

[Kurtdog]

Mark's banishment had nothing to do with FBL's or Franklin's.............MJ

 

Hopefully you are correct about that. Other posters here and ATS thought that it was the discussion about FBLs that triggered the bannings.

 

Franklin halves were often weakly struck so even when uncirculated most of them didn't show the full bell lines (FBLs) especially along the bottom of the liberty bell on the reverse.

 

If PCGS made errors in grading Franklin halves, and wrongly applied the FBL designation to slabbed coins which were then sold in public auction, it might end up being a little problem for them similar to a consumer recall notice.

 

However, if PCGS tried to cover up their errors with bannings and deleted postings, that could be absolutely scandalous.

 

Will we ever find out the full truth?

 

I was apparently banned for what I posted to that thread, though I had not made any comment regarding Franklin Half dollars or PCGS grading.

 

David Hall posted that PCGS had spent "$7,000,000+" over 25 years, as a result of the PCGS grading guarantee. When I saw that figure, I posted something to the effect of:

 

"David, regardless of how excellent you believe PCGS grading to be, isn't "$7,000,000+" a very small amount, compared to the total value of coins graded by PCGS? Even if by "$7,000,000+" you meant $70,000,000, I would have asked the same question."

 

(Edited to add: My above question and comment weren't intended as a compliment or an insult to PCGS, but rather, an observation, for people to make of, whatever they wished.)

 

After posting that, then, without any warning, not being able to post again, I sent the following email to PCGS:

 

"You have been forbidden to post/reply or edit a message in these forums"

 

"Hi .... I got the above message this afternoon.

 

To my knowledge, I haven't violated any forum rules or received any warnings about anything, and have been a solid contributor.

 

I traveled to Sacramento today, and the last thread I can remember posting to earlier in the day, was one that has since been deleted. I posted a reply to David (Hall) and it was to the effect that: regardless of how excellent he thought PCGS grading was, his figure of $7,000,000+ in buybacks over 25 years didn't sound like very much, compared to the total value of coins graded by PCGS. I didn't say anything negative about PCGS or to or about anyone else.

 

Please advise.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mark"

 

I subsequently received an email from David Hall. Among other things, I was told that my post was insulting, that I had a lot of gall, that I added fuel to the fire and that I was being negative.

 

Considering that "With more than 20 million coins graded commanding a total value of over $20 billion..." appears on the PCGS website, it seems that "$7,000,000+" is, indeed, a very small amount compared to the total value of coins graded by PCGS.

 

And that, is the whole story, as I know it.

 

I will not post again to this thread. And, based on the way I feel I was treated, I do not plan to ask to be reinstated on the PCGS forum.

 

I greatly appreciate the supportive comments and messages I have received, but please do not bash PCGS on my account, thereby risking getting banned, yourselves.

 

Continuing with my fine tradition of managing to risk offending a certain number of people in my first post in a new forum, I'll tell you this much, Mark, they're a cult over there, and their agenda is to keep their membership brainwashed. You rocked the boat, and that's why you're out of there. Any thinking person can see that.

 

FWIW, you're better off, here.

 

PS: PM forthcoming, if I can figure out how to do it...

[cpm9ball]

PS: PM forthcoming, if I can figure out how to do it...

 

Just click on Mark's username and select the PM from the drop down menu.

 

Chris

[michael]

oh my

 

my my my my my my my my my my my my my my my my my

[Elbesaar]

 

My friend, Broadstruck, was just Bammed ATS - no reason given.

 

 

[Buffalo Head]

My friend, Broadstruck, was just Bammed ATS - no reason given.

 

 

When did this happen? Boy what in the world is going on over there? Broadstruck has been there forever and a very nice guy.....I'm sorry to hear this, but I'm sure he'll find his way over here "on the sunny side of the street ....Joe

[blu62vette]

My friend, Broadstruck, was just Bammed ATS - no reason given.

 

 

They always have a reason, that doesnt mean it is always justified. I dont know if they tell people why they are banned.

[Tradedollarnut]

It's too bad that when one yahoo decides to flame out that he takes good people with him.

[dimefreak]

In all fairness nobody held a gun to Boradstrucks head and told him to use the word beaver to insinuate something else thats considered inappropriate.

[BillJones]

My friend, Broadstruck, was just Bammed ATS - no reason given.

 

 

As Harry Truman used to say, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." Or in the case of these bannings, you remove the stove from the kitchen instead.

 

I sure am glad that I don't collect coins or tokens with that offense rodent on them. And I’ll have remember to avoid posting a picture of a very rude political campaign button that surfaced during the 1984 presidential race.

[mkman123]

broadstruck got banned? wow, he is a great guy, always been helpful.

[mrearlygold]

broadstruck got banned? wow, he is a great guy, always been helpful.

 

 

What a shame.