With all due respect to our host, if censorship gets too radical here, there are other forum venues.
This was a valuable thread and penalizing those who have been civil and respectful is harsh.
Refs: MCM,Fivecents,Julio,Robman,Endzone,Coiny,Agentjim007,Musky1011,holeinone1972,Tdec1000,Type2,bumanchu, Metalsman,Wondercoin,Pitboss,Tomohawk,carew4me,segoja,thebigeng,jlc_coin,mbogoman,sportsmod,dragon,tychojoe,Schmitz7,claychaser, Bullsitter, robeck, Nickpatton, jwitten, and many OTHERS
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime. People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime. People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach. >>
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case
"I'm dropping my standards so that I can buy more"
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case >>
So you don't think a ban really means a ban, right? The pathological troublemakers come back under good behavior for a while, usually wasting all our time pretending to be a newbie and asking innocent questions, then they resort to the same behavior that got them banned before.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
Displaying IPs is sort of meaningless. IP addys can be changed pretty easily. If people really want to come back, they can find a way...until they screw up again.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again.
Successful transactions with keepdachange, tizofthe, adriana, wondercoin
<< <i>Displaying IPs is sort of meaningless. IP addys can be changed pretty easily. If people really want to come back, they can find a way...until they screw up again.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again. >>
We thank PCGS for restoring this.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case >>
So you don't think a ban really means a ban, right? The pathological troublemakers come back under good behavior for a while, usually wasting all our time pretending to be a newbie and asking innocent questions, then they resort to the same behavior that got them banned before. >>
I guess it depends what they got banished for....unethical practices or thieving from members maybe, but ignorant comments or political viewpoins, probably not a federal offense. PS since the original thread has been restored in glorious technicolor, this thread is now moot
"I'm dropping my standards so that I can buy more"
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime. People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach. >>
Why don't you lead by example. Put your last name up there (I doubt Coins is your last name).
"That's a federally prosecutable crime."
Why didn't you quote the Federal statue or CFR to back up your claim rather than a newspaper's own policy?
"The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach."
This pertains more to contract law than a federal crime. Besides, do you really want to support 10,000,000 people that get thrown in the slammer because they used a "Handle" on a forum. Next you will want anyone using a CB to use their real name or to the slammer they go.
While we are speaking of "breaking the law," anyone who "outs" a member or ebay seller who they believe did them wrong on a forum could also be prosecuted in the same manner as putting someone's name on a billboard who wrote you a bad check. You could be civilly liable (it happened where I live and the check writer no only got their name removed from the billboard but got several thousand dollars in punitive damages).
Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong.
Not to seem offensive to anyone, but not much of earth-shaking import actually gets discussed on this board.
And it's still a hobby. An expensive one, granted, but a hobby nontheless.
And would we really want people getting barred, with criminal penalities, from websites? So, for instance, if a news-related forum "barred" you for stating an unpopular political belief, as a nation, should we really support the police dragging you away for posting your opinion again under an assumned name. Unless I missed something, you're still sitting in your living room, typing away...you're not actually stealing anything. You might be a crank, but I'm not seeing any "crime" here.
If that's not Orwellian, I don't know what is?
And as for violating terms of service, give me a break. A lawyer can write up anything in a contract...but just try making all those terms enforceable in any court of law.
And don't laugh, just last week I saw an article where someone was trying to make it a "crime" to lie about your physical attributes on dating sites (and Facebook)...so this is all a very dangerously slippery slope.
<< <i>Displaying IPs is sort of meaningless. IP addys can be changed pretty easily. If people really want to come back, they can find a way...until they screw up again.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again. >>
<< <i>Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong. >>
I like this idea. They should have one tier for basic access with a nominal charge and an up-charge to post on the BST.
<< <i>Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong. >>
I like this idea. They should have one tier for basic access with a nominal charge and an up-charge to post on the BST. >>
I believe you should be able to do both at the Silver level and above. You have a membership, so you should be able to participate. However, if you don't want to pay $50 to read and post, then move on. It would give added value to the Silver level other than population reports and the ability to submit coins for grading. Frankly, I believe it should be against forum rules to ask for, provide or post Pop reports. It undermines the reason to have a Silver level membership. If people can't pay $50 to get this info, then they need to move on.
Of course, a "Pay to play" action would severly undermine the major marketing aspect of this board...namely first getting people interested...and then [hopefully] having them pay to join PCGS.
If you take out the hits the PCGS web site gets out of the boards then its ratings would crash. The other grading companies would LOVE to have the trafic on this board. It is a fantastic use of ones advertising budget.
I'm OK with having a paid membership to access premium features or even to use the boards...but I've never been a fan of having to pay for the privilege of spending more money with a TPG, i.e., having to be a member of a club, etc. to submit. They should allow submissions from the public (perhaps at a slightly higher rate-members get a discount, thus incentivizing membership without alienating those who don't care to be members-yet still getting their money on submissions). This has always been my primary gripe. It's akin to having a show where you have one admission fee to get you into the lobby, then another admission fee to actually enter the bourse.
<< <i>If you take out the hits the PCGS web site gets out of the boards then its ratings would crash. The other grading companies would LOVE to have the trafic on this board. It is a fantastic use of ones advertising budget. >>
That is very true. Maybe reading is free but you have to be a member to post. I don't really have an answer other than I don't think it is a good idea to require full names when you are showing and discussing items of value, such as coins, gold and silver bullion.
Also, like I said above, some non-members come here to request and receive information that is only available to paid members. In effect, some members are giving these services away for free. I am really surprised CU puts up with it.
Also, like I said above, some non-members come here to request and receive information that is only available to paid members. In effect, some members are giving these services away for free. I am really surprised CU puts up with it. >>
Maybe due to there return to the CU boards,and they become paid members.Sometimes you need to give something to get something .And what there giving (PCGS) is very small for the return...just a thought.
<< <i>Also, like I said above, some non-members come here to request and receive information that is only available to paid members. In effect, some members are giving these services away for free. I am really surprised CU puts up with it. >>
Maybe due to there return to the CU boards,and they become paid members.Sometimes you need to give something to get something .And what there giving (PCGS) is very small for the return...just a thought. >>
Then just make the information free to all. So, what you are saying is if they want their coins graded, they have to pay a fee to have the ability to pay a fee to get their coins graded. But,it is ok to have paid members give out information that other members pay for.
Comments
This was a valuable thread and penalizing those who have been civil and respectful is harsh.
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding
Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their
fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to
sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime.
People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach.
<< <i>
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding
Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their
fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to
sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime.
People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach. >>
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case >>
So you don't think a ban really means a ban, right? The pathological troublemakers come back under good behavior for a while, usually
wasting all our time pretending to be a newbie and asking innocent questions, then they resort to the same behavior that got them banned
before.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again.
<< <i>Displaying IPs is sort of meaningless. IP addys can be changed pretty easily. If people really want to come back, they can find a way...until they screw up again.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again. >>
We thank PCGS for restoring this.
<< <i> >>
unless PCGS states its a crime too, I wouldnt worry too much about people getting banned for posting some political nonsense or whatever the reason for the poof was.... and if lets say "butterfinger1010101" gets banned and the person comes back as stickyfingers20202020, I doubt Eric Holder will be on the case >>
So you don't think a ban really means a ban, right? The pathological troublemakers come back under good behavior for a while, usually
wasting all our time pretending to be a newbie and asking innocent questions, then they resort to the same behavior that got them banned
before. >>
I guess it depends what they got banished for....unethical practices or thieving from members maybe, but ignorant comments or political viewpoins, probably not a federal offense. PS since the original thread has been restored in glorious technicolor, this thread is now moot
<< <i>
<< <i>Frank---this is not one of your better thought out suggestions. Folks here don't want to reveal their identity as coin collectors to keep from getting burglarized or robbed. If your suggestion was implemented, I and many others would stop posting here. >>
I think it's very well thought out. I would hope many people would stop posting if they won't show who they are. Our Founding
Fathers all signed their real names to the Declaration of Independence -- knowing they were signing their death warrants if their
fight for freedom was unsuccessful.
But I would settle for a display of IP addresses, just to stop the alts.
I don't know why PCGS is so forgiving of alts. If you have been banned from a any forum or message board, trying to
sign up under a fake ID is considered unauthorized access of a computer system. That's a federally prosecutable crime.
People here just chuckle about it.
A typical warning from the Houston Chronicle"
If The Chronicle has banned you from the Web Site or any of the services on or available through the Web Site, for any reason, in its sole discretion, you may not return to the Web Site for any reason or in any manner. In the event that you do return, or attempt to return, to the Web Site or a particular service after you have been banned, you will be deemed to have breached these Terms and Conditions, and The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach. >>
Why don't you lead by example. Put your last name up there (I doubt Coins is your last name).
"That's a federally prosecutable crime."
Why didn't you quote the Federal statue or CFR to back up your claim rather than a newspaper's own policy?
"The Chronicle reserves the right to pursue all rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity with respect to such breach."
This pertains more to contract law than a federal crime. Besides, do you really want to support 10,000,000 people that get thrown in the slammer because they used a "Handle" on a forum. Next you will want anyone using a CB to use their real name or to the slammer they go.
While we are speaking of "breaking the law," anyone who "outs" a member or ebay seller who they believe did them wrong on a forum could also be prosecuted in the same manner as putting someone's name on a billboard who wrote you a bad check. You could be civilly liable (it happened where I live and the check writer no only got their name removed from the billboard but got several thousand dollars in punitive damages).
Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong.
And it's still a hobby. An expensive one, granted, but a hobby nontheless.
And would we really want people getting barred, with criminal penalities, from websites? So, for instance, if a news-related forum "barred" you for stating an unpopular political belief, as a nation, should we really support the police dragging you away for posting your opinion again under an assumned name. Unless I missed something, you're still sitting in your living room, typing away...you're not actually stealing anything. You might be a crank, but I'm not seeing any "crime" here.
If that's not Orwellian, I don't know what is?
And as for violating terms of service, give me a break. A lawyer can write up anything in a contract...but just try making all those terms enforceable in any court of law.
And don't laugh, just last week I saw an article where someone was trying to make it a "crime" to lie about your physical attributes on dating sites (and Facebook)...so this is all a very dangerously slippery slope.
Good news!!
They must have taken the insults to heart and made amends...:-)
Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014
<< <i>
<< <i>Displaying IPs is sort of meaningless. IP addys can be changed pretty easily. If people really want to come back, they can find a way...until they screw up again.
Anyways, the 25th thread is back in action. Who knows what caused the poof, anyways, I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll be enjoying the thread again. >>
We thank PCGS for restoring this. >>
I big THANKS!!!!!
<< <i>Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong. >>
I like this idea. They should have one tier for basic access with a nominal charge and an up-charge to post on the BST.
<< <i>
<< <i>Personally, I believe the best way to solve this is to limit access to PAID members only. If you are not a member, you can't read it or post to it. Then CU would have all the information they wanted to ban people, would have the IP address to block them and if they want to keep spending money and different IP address to make a post after been banned, then go ahead. If they don't behave, bam they get banded again. Hopefully being paid members, CU would give a warning or two to let you fix the post they feel was wrong. >>
I like this idea. They should have one tier for basic access with a nominal charge and an up-charge to post on the BST. >>
I believe you should be able to do both at the Silver level and above. You have a membership, so you should be able to participate. However, if you don't want to pay $50 to read and post, then move on. It would give added value to the Silver level other than population reports and the ability to submit coins for grading. Frankly, I believe it should be against forum rules to ask for, provide or post Pop reports. It undermines the reason to have a Silver level membership. If people can't pay $50 to get this info, then they need to move on.
<< <i>The thread is back!! >>
just kidding...
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>If you take out the hits the PCGS web site gets out of the boards then its ratings would crash. The other grading companies would LOVE to have the trafic on this board. It is a fantastic use of ones advertising budget. >>
That is very true. Maybe reading is free but you have to be a member to post. I don't really have an answer other than I don't think it is a good idea to require full names when you are showing and discussing items of value, such as coins, gold and silver bullion.
Also, like I said above, some non-members come here to request and receive information that is only available to paid members. In effect, some members are giving these services away for free. I am really surprised CU puts up with it.
Maybe due to there return to the CU boards,and they become paid members.Sometimes
you need to give something to get something .And what there giving (PCGS) is very small
for the return...just a thought.
<< <i>Also, like I said above, some non-members come here to request and receive information that is only available to paid members. In effect, some members are giving these services away for free. I am really surprised CU puts up with it. >>
Maybe due to there return to the CU boards,and they become paid members.Sometimes
you need to give something to get something .And what there giving (PCGS) is very small
for the return...just a thought. >>
Then just make the information free to all. So, what you are saying is if they want their coins graded, they have to pay a fee to have the ability to pay a fee to get their coins graded. But,it is ok to have paid members give out information that other members pay for.
does some searching.