Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21
    Hey CardsAndPhils,

    You must think ELI MANNING is an absolute scumbag and far worse for the hobby than Vegas Dave, right?

    See: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2...-fraud-lawsuit

    Manning caught saying the following in an email submitted into evidence during the trial: get "2 helmets that can pass as game used"

    As for me ... I think Manning has been a class act for a long-time and comes off like a scumbag in this one instance ... I still believe he'll be a first ballot HOF'er, but since he's human, he does both good and bad as people are people and none of them deserve to be put on a pedestal.
    I collect true 1/1 autographed RCs of Jameis Winston with my son Hidden Content

    We champions ... through everything that we went through, through all the haters ... we came out victorious. And God did this. Im so blessed.
    Jameis Winston, after winning BCS National Championship game

  2. Check out the deals at Allgood Collectibles eBay Store
  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Jameis1of1 View Post
    I agree with you 100%, however, be careful Pwaldo, "CardsAndPhils" may read your above statement as a defense of Dave as a human being and a promotion of Dave as a businessman, hahahahaha
    What pwaldo said is that singles could use a boost. They an. He never called one of the biggest skidmarks of the hobby a "nice" guy or defended his criminal/highly unethical activities. That's why your comments stir me.

  4. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Jameis1of1 View Post
    Hey CardsAndPhils,

    You must think ELI MANNING is an absolute scumbag and far worse for the hobby than Vegas Dave, right?

    See: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2...-fraud-lawsuit

    Manning caught saying the following in an email submitted into evidence during the trial: get "2 helmets that can pass as game used"

    As for me ... I think Manning has been a class act for a long-time and comes off like a scumbag in this one instance ... I still believe he'll be a first ballot HOF'er, but since he's human, he does both good and bad as people are people and none of them deserve to be put on a pedestal.
    I don't know enough about his career to comment (I don't follow football at all, and couldn't name five current players if I had to), but I am aware of the story you mentioned. As far as the hobby goes, he is also a scumbag. Let's put that QB from Dallas that used an auto pen for his certified Panini autographs into that class too.

    My comments about Dave are about his relationship with the hobby (and his other criminal activity... Which I'm using as a basis for general character). In those terms, he's a scumbag, and your defense of his actions has done nothing to change my mind.

    And yes, saying "but he only committed fraud because the casinos kicked him out" is a defense. Also "everybody shill bids, and nobody is forcing buyers to bid so much" is a defense. Those are indefensible activities that you are attempting to explain away. That is a defense. So, you can say over and over again that you're not defending him, but it doesn't change the fact that you actually are.

  5. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by CardsAndPhils View Post
    What pwaldo said is that singles could use a boost. They an. He never called one of the biggest skidmarks of the hobby a "nice" guy or defended his criminal/highly unethical activities. That's why your comments stir me.
    I agree that what Pwaldo said was 100% accurate ... as is every word I have typed on this subject. And, again, I never said Dave was a nice guy, I merely said he was nice to me when he contacted me via Twitter and later email. He was nice to me ... do you want me to lie about him and say he was a jerk to me or tried to defraud me, when he never did that, just because you view him as a bad guy? What I said was true ... take it how you will.

    Quote Originally Posted by CardsAndPhils View Post
    I don't know enough about his career to comment (I don't follow football at all, and couldn't name five current players if I had to), but I am aware of the story you mentioned. As far as the hobby goes, he is also a scumbag. Let's put that QB from Dallas that used an auto pen for his certified Panini autographs into that class too.
    Yeah, I was really disgusted by Dak Prescott using the autopen as well, but I wouldn't just say both he and Eli Manning are "scumbags" because they did one thing that I don't like ... lives and reputations don't boil down to just one event or instance ... every adult that has ever lived, with the exception of the sinless Jesus Christ of Nazareth has likely done a great deal of bad to go along with the good they have done in their lives.

    My comments about Dave are about his relationship with the hobby (and his other criminal activity... Which I'm using as a basis for general character). In those terms, he's a scumbag, and your defense of his actions has done nothing to change my mind.
    I never "defended" him and I certainly never even attempted to "change your mind" as to how you view his character ... you read things into my statements that were never there, twisted my words for no reason, and tried to refute arguments I never even made ... I've had fun going back and forth with you but the whole thing has been a bit strange to say the least.

    And yes, saying "but he only committed fraud because the casinos kicked him out" is a defense.
    Except, that isn't what I said and that's not a direct quote from anything I typed so it's disingenuous for you to put such a statement in quotes as if I said it. You like to pretend I said things I never said and then refute those things I never said ... it's extremely strange.

    What I actually typed, word for word is as follows: "Wasn't that because he was banned for betting in Vegas casinos and he simply wanted to keep betting in such casinos, so he did so using other SSN's? If so, I don't think that hurts his reputation but strengthens it ... as many will think he had to be amazing at betting to get banned, and they will even like the "rebel attitude" of bucking the system to keep betting. I'm not personally defending his actions, just saying how many will likely view it."


    I stand by the above statement 100% and there is nothing you can refute about it and no reason to even get upset by it. I merely asked a question and then said how I thought others would likely view it, yet you pretend that I was personally defending him and even approving of his actions ... absurd.

    Also "everybody shill bids, and nobody is forcing buyers to bid so much" is a defense.
    Once again, even though you use quotes you did not actually quote me which I don't appreciate as it's not an honest way to debate or even have a conversation. My statement on your accusation (one that is still unfounded as you have never provided any evidence that he ever shill bid on his own consigned cards in the first place) that he was shill bidding can easily be seen in post #11 on the second page of this thread, and I stand by every word I typed 100%. I never "defended" shill bidding, I merely said I don't personally care if owners bid up their consigned cards, and that is absolutely the way I personally feel. Again, should I lie or allow your opinion something to become my opinion? Or, can I tell the truth and speak for myself? Regardless, I stand by my statement 100%

    Those are indefensible activities that you are attempting to explain away. That is a defense.
    You personally believe the SSN thing and the supposed shilling are "indefensible activities". I merely stated that many will not view the SSN thing as indefensible in the least and I also stated that I personally don't care if some owner of a consigned card shills it as I simply won't bid if the auctions goes above what I feel the card is worth. I never defended Dave himself personally and have no desire to do so, I merely stated my personal opinions and will not allow you to tell me how I must think on a certain issue. Nor will I pretend that your accusation that I defended Dave's actions is legitimate, when it is obviously erroneous and when you have consistently twisted my words, pretended to quote me while changing my words, and failed to comprehend many of my statements whatsoever. And, as always, I stand by every word I have typed in this thread to date, 100%

    So, you can say over and over again that you're not defending him, but it doesn't change the fact that you actually are.
    No, I did not and your accusation that I did so has no more bearing than if I claimed that you defended the act of rape (as you refused to ever condemn Kobe or Mike Tyson when I brought them up) or PED use (as you refused to condemn Barry Bonds when I brought him up) or cocaine use and choking reporters and filing false income tax returns and raping teenage girls and being a deadbeat dad (as you refused to condemn Lawrence Taylor when I brought him up). In fact, if I accused you of defending such heinous acts as those, I'd actually be on firmer ground than you are in accusing me of defending Dave, as I have specifically said I don't defend him, pointed out I think he'll lose his civil case regarding the counterfeit Jordan card, pointed out he had done bad, etc., while you have not said one single solitary word against any of the acts of Kobe, Tyson or Lawrence Taylor despite me bringing all of those plyers up more than once.

    So, which is it, did I defend Dave's bad actions AND you defend raping teenage girls, cocaine use, choking reporters and the like ... or ... did you not defend any of those individuals and their heinous actions AND I also never defended Dave or his bad actions .... or .... did I never defend Dave or his bad actions AND you actually do look up to those players so much so that you don't want to condemn their actions .... hahahahahha ... see what happens when you twist a person's word, set up fake arguments he never made so you can tear them down and even misquote him entirely to try to win an argument? You come out looking silly!

    However, I think our little back and forth has given a lot of readers some serious enjoyment as it's a fun read I've been told; therefore I'm happy to have participated.
    Last edited by Jameis1of1; 05-15-2018 at 12:14 PM.
    I collect true 1/1 autographed RCs of Jameis Winston with my son Hidden Content

    We champions ... through everything that we went through, through all the haters ... we came out victorious. And God did this. Im so blessed.
    Jameis Winston, after winning BCS National Championship game

  6. #25
    When I put quotes around your defense arguments, I was paraphrasing/summarizing. I assumed any reasonable person would be able to figure that out. I was wrong, I suppose. Or, you're beating me up over semantics because you have run out of reasonable arguments... I'm guessing the latter.

    But, alas, I think I have figured out where our disconnect is. I realized it when you missed a very important part of my last post. I said about Eli Manning (direct quote): "As far as the hobby goes, he is also a scumbag. Let's put that QB from Dallas that used an auto pen for his certified Panini autographs into that class too." (emphasis added)

    Your response (direct quote): "Yeah, I was really disgusted by Dak Prescott using the autopen as well, but I wouldn't just say both he and Eli Manning are "scumbags" because they did one thing that I don't like ... lives and reputations don't boil down to just one event or instance."

    There lies the disconnect. You are taking about people as a whole... Speaking of their entire lives in general. I'm speaking SPECIFICALLY of these people (Eli, Dak, Vegas Dave, etc.) in terms of their reputations in THE HOBBY (this is, after all, a hobby forum).

    I never said that the things you said about Vegas Dave were not facts. Maybe you should ask the people whose SS #s he used if they care that he only used them because he was banned from the casinos. I'm guessing they won't. Ask anybody that's ever been the victim of shill bidding if they think it's a big deal. They'll likely say yes. I've had my identity stolen. I've had people shill bid on items I was trying to buy. These are things that are indefensible.

    But, hey, keep saying how nice he is, and he'll likely never screw you over. I'll call it like I see it, and avoid working with him so I won't have to worry about being his next victim.

    Good luck to you. If you're dealing with him, you'll likely need it.

  7. #26
    BTW, in the interest of transparency, your last post kinda fell into TLDR. If there is something in there in particular that you wanted a response to, let me know. I pretty much quit reading when I realized what the disconnect was.

  8. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by CardsAndPhils View Post
    When I put quotes around your defense arguments, I was paraphrasing/summarizing. I assumed any reasonable person would be able to figure that out. I was wrong, I suppose. Or, you're beating me up over semantics because you have run out of reasonable arguments... I'm guessing the latter.
    When one paraphrases someone, one must still paraphrase the person's actual thoughts, not twist their words so bad that their original meaning is completely lost ... and that is what you have done, time and time and time again.

    But, alas, I think I have figured out where our disconnect is. I realized it when you missed a very important part of my last post. I said about Eli Manning (direct quote): "As far as the hobby goes, he is also a scumbag. Let's put that QB from Dallas that used an auto pen for his certified Panini autographs into that class too." (emphasis added)

    Your response (direct quote): "Yeah, I was really disgusted by Dak Prescott using the autopen as well, but I wouldn't just say both he and Eli Manning are "scumbags" because they did one thing that I don't like ... lives and reputations don't boil down to just one event or instance."

    There lies the disconnect. You are taking about people as a whole... Speaking of their entire lives in general. I'm speaking SPECIFICALLY of these people (Eli, Dak, Vegas Dave, etc.) in terms of their reputations in THE HOBBY (this is, after all, a hobby forum).
    Okay, I'm glad you clarified that in regards to Eli Manning and Dak, but your previous statements didn't seem to be focused only on the hobby but rather on Dave as a person and other shady characters he may bring into the hobby as people.

    I never said that the things you said about Vegas Dave were not facts.

    Than why give me a hard time about them? If you acknowledge everything I said was factual, you should realize you were debating with me for no reason ...


    Maybe you should ask the people whose SS #s he used if they care that he only used them because he was banned from the casinos. I'm guessing they won't.
    I don't have any clue what really went down with the whole SS# thing ... for all I know he told the people he was going to use their SS#'s to bet and he paid them for the numbers and then a percentage of the profits he won using their SS# ... I really have no clue what that whole things was about. If you know more about it, please elaborate on it.

    Ask anybody that's ever been the victim of shill bidding if they think it's a big deal. They'll likely say yes. I've had my identity stolen. I've had people shill bid on items I was trying to buy. These are things that are indefensible.

    I've bought many items that were shilled on and I never cared. If the bidding eclipsed the value I assigned to the item, I simply stopped bidding. I honestly don't see why it's a big deal but I am open-minded on the issue and I'd be willing to listen to your arguments as why it is so bad and why it's "indefensible" ...


    But, hey, keep saying how nice he is, and he'll likely never screw you over. I'll call it like I see it, and avoid working with him so I won't have to worry about being his next victim.
    Again, I never said he was a nice person, I merely said he was nice to me, which was 100% true ... again, should I bear false witness against him and say he was a jerk to me, when he wasn't? Would that make you happy?

    Good luck to you. If you're dealing with him, you'll likely need it.
    No, I'm definitely not dealing with Dave in any way. If I ever wanted to sell any of my items and he was the one offering the most money, I'd have no problem selling to him, but I have no intention of buying any of the cards he owns or doing any business with him.

    BTW, in the interest of transparency, your last post kinda fell into TLDR. If there is something in there in particular that you wanted a response to, let me know. I pretty much quit reading when I realized what the disconnect was.
    You've dodged multiple issues I've raised, multiple times ... re-read my whole post.
    I collect true 1/1 autographed RCs of Jameis Winston with my son Hidden Content

    We champions ... through everything that we went through, through all the haters ... we came out victorious. And God did this. Im so blessed.
    Jameis Winston, after winning BCS National Championship game

  9. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Jameis1of1 View Post
    When one paraphrases someone, one must still paraphrase the person's actual thoughts, not twist their words so bad that their original meaning is completely lost ... and that is what you have done, time and time and time again.



    Okay, I'm glad you clarified that in regards to Eli Manning and Dak, but your previous statements didn't seem to be focused only on the hobby but rather on Dave as a person and other shady characters he may bring into the hobby as people.



    Than why give me a hard time about them? If you acknowledge everything I said was factual, you should realize you were debating with me for no reason ...




    I don't have any clue what really went down with the whole SS# thing ... for all I know he told the people he was going to use their SS#'s to bet and he paid them for the numbers and then a percentage of the profits he won using their SS# ... I really have no clue what that whole things was about. If you know more about it, please elaborate on it.



    I've bought many items that were shilled on and I never cared. If the bidding eclipsed the value I assigned to the item, I simply stopped bidding. I honestly don't see why it's a big deal but I am open-minded on the issue and I'd be willing to listen to your arguments as why it is so bad and why it's "indefensible" ...




    Again, I never said he was a nice person, I merely said he was nice to me, which was 100% true ... again, should I bear false witness against him and say he was a jerk to me, when he wasn't? Would that make you happy?



    No, I'm definitely not dealing with Dave in any way. If I ever wanted to sell any of my items and he was the one offering the most money, I'd have no problem selling to him, but I have no intention of buying any of the cards he owns or doing any business with him.



    You've dodged multiple issues I've raised, multiple times ... re-read my whole post.
    I paraphrased the way I interpreted your posts. If you meant it differently, perhaps you should be more clear. Because the way it reads is (paraphrasing how I took it): "Yeah, he did some bad stuff. But, he only did it because (insert really lame reason here) so it's OK, because he brings attention to the hobby."

    I didn't clarify anything that I said about Manning or the cowboys guy. I literally gave an EXACT quote of what I said before. I can't help that you ignored the fact that I was talking about the hobby (because, why else would we be having this conversation on a HOBBY forum, ya know?).

    You keep saying that you're not defending him. I'm starting to think that you don't know what the word defend means. I copied the definition for you... "speak or write in favor of (an action or person); attempt to justify." How is that not what you did? You wrote in favor of a person in an attempt to justify his actions. It, literally, is EXACTLY what you did.

    I provided where I got my information from about the shill bidding. It provides more information than what you found, but I suspect you would find some reason to discredit it because it smears the name of your buddy. Whatever, it doesn't matter because you don't see anything wrong about artificially inflated card prices. You think it's the victims fault because "nobody is forcing them to bid," so they were obviously asking to be scammed.

    The only other thing I see that I didn't address was the ludicrous idea that I somehow think that rape and a litany of other things are OK. I won't even justify it with a response, because it has nothing to do with the hobby. Which, in case you missed it from the first four times I've said it...THAT'S WHY I'M HERE!

    Please keep my name out of your mouth. By now, you probably have a negative opinion of me... Which is supremely ironic, because you have nothing but good things to say about a low life criminal.

  10. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by CardsAndPhils View Post
    I paraphrased the way I interpreted your posts. If you meant it differently, perhaps you should be more clear. Because the way it reads is (paraphrasing how I took it): "Yeah, he did some bad stuff. But, he only did it because (insert really lame reason here) so it's OK, because he brings attention to the hobby."
    My statements were clear ... you didn't need to "interpret" them, you needed to just take them at face value.

    I didn't clarify anything that I said about Manning or the cowboys guy. I literally gave an EXACT quote of what I said before. I can't help that you ignored the fact that I was talking about the hobby (because, why else would we be having this conversation on a HOBBY forum, ya know?).
    I didn't ignore anything you said. I simply said I don't consider them to be scumbags in general. I never said you considered them such. However, I don't believe you were only talking about the hobby when you were talking about Dave, which is the whole point.

    You keep saying that you're not defending him.
    Indeed, because you keep stating that I am defending him, even though you have to twist my words and read into my statements things that aren't there, to do so.

    I'm starting to think that you don't know what the word defend means. I copied the definition for you... "speak or write in favor of (an action or person); attempt to justify." How is that not what you did? You wrote in favor of a person in an attempt to justify his actions. It, literally, is EXACTLY what you did.
    You have a severe problem with reading comprehension, don't you? I never justified a single thing he did. I never said he was right to sell a counterfeit card; in fact I explicitly said I think he'll lose a civil case and rightfully so. I also never said he was right to use other's SSN #s; I merely said I can see other people thinking such an action boosts his credibility as a successful gambler. I also never said he was right to shill his auctions, I merely stated that I personally don't care if an auction I am bidding on is being shilled. So, no, it's not literally or exactly what I did ... I actually did the exact opposite as I never justified a single thing Dave himself did ... again, you have a severe problem with reading comprehension, don't you?

    I provided where I got my information from about the shill bidding. It provides more information than what you found,
    I typed in "Vegas Dave" and it didn't give any particulars and there wasn't even a letter search to search for last names that begin with "O" as it said his last was Oancea ... just shoot me a link as I'd be interested in reading it.

    but I suspect you would find some reason to discredit it because it smears the name of your buddy.
    This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about. You have as much reason to say Dave is my buddy as I do to say you approve of choking reporters, raping teenage girls and doing cocaine since you refused to condemn Lawrence Taylor ... nothing I said would lead any logical person to think Dave is my buddy, yet you find a way to claim such ... ridiculous.

    Whatever, it doesn't matter because you don't see anything wrong about artificially inflated card prices.
    That's your reply? I ask you to explain why you feel owners shilling their own consigned cards is so bad and indefensible and you simply personally insult me? Grow up sir and act like an adult. I am completely open-minded on this issue and would like to read your thoughts on the issue if you care to put on your big boy pants and share such.

    By the way, since it's not even against eBay rules, let alone illegal for an owner to shill their own consigned cards, are you consistent and do you put your beliefs into actions and refuse to ever buy or sell on eBay? I mean, how can you possibly say it's an indefensible evil if you're still using the very service (eBay) that allows and even encourages such a thing to take place? Wouldn't you be acting like a hypocrite in doing so? The whole thing is absurd to me ...


    You think it's the victims fault because "nobody is forcing them to bid," so they were obviously asking to be scammed.
    I don't think bidders are victims. They can stop bidding at any time and even refuse to pay if the auction was shilled and they can prove it ... I do NOT think they are victims, period. I also don't understand what the difference is between an owner shilling his own consigned card up to a certain amount, or just demanding that the auction have a reserve of the same amount as they are the same thing ... it's the owner's card and he can "require" whatever minimum price he wants for his or her own card ... I don't understand why that's a big deal so explain it to me.

    The only other thing I see that I didn't address was the ludicrous idea that I somehow think that rape and a litany of other things are OK. I won't even justify it with a response, because it has nothing to do with the hobby. Which, in case you missed it from the first four times I've said it...THAT'S WHY I'M HERE!
    Try to follow along ... you seem to believe Dave is a scumbag and only bad for the hobby because even if he's done some good for the hobby, his bad outweighs his good ... fine. I then asked you if you think that athletes like Kobe, Mike Tyson and Lawrence Taylor are also only bad for their respective sports (as Dave would be for this hobby) and you refused to answer ... why? It's a perfectly legitimate question and I honestly have more reason to assume you must agree with choking reporters, raping teenage girls and doing cocaine (as you refuse to condemn those players as being only bad for their sports the way you seem to condemn Dave for being only bad for this hobby) than you do to assume Dave is my buddy.

    It doesn't feel good when people completely ignore the context of your statements and just run with their own wild narrative does it? Again, just debate honestly and like an adult and you won't run into such problems.


    Please keep my name out of your mouth.
    Hahahahahahahahahaha, what?????????????????????????????????

    By now, you probably have a negative opinion of me... Which is supremely ironic, because you have nothing but good things to say about a low life criminal.
    You're wrong on both counts ... per the usual.

    Firstly, I don't have a negative opinion of you in relation to the hobby or as a human being in general. I do think you have a serious problem with reading comprehension and I do think you debate in a rather juvenile way, but probably 90% of the population has issues with those two things, so it's not that big of a deal. You've been fun to dialogue with and I know a lot of people have got a kick out of our back and forth, so the whole thing has been a positive for me.

    Secondly, I have made it clear that I believe Dave should lose the civil case filed against him regarding the counterfeit Jordan card, that most people probably find him to be a bad guy and that I have never done business with him nor do I plan to do so, yet you say I have "nothing but good things to say" about him? I mean, seriously, no one with even average reading comprehension skills can read those statements and then believe that Dave must be my buddy and I only say good things about him ... so I assume you purposely misstate my position because you have some ulterior motive to do so, which is sad.

    In fact, the only thing I ever said that could even be interpreted as saying something "good about a low life criminal" is that he was nice to me when he contacted me via Twitter and later via email, that's it. I said that because that is 100% true, yet you seem to have a real problem with me telling the truth and would prefer it if I bore false witness about someone you find distasteful ... I think that's rather pathetic.

    There are many people I feel are quite despicable human beings, but I don't want even those people to be lied about. Let them be exposed and vilified for things they actually did, not for things they never did.

    You sound like a crooked cop who would see a former criminal being assaulted in the street for no reason and say "I'm not going to help as that guy did some bad things in the past so he doesn't deserve to be treated like a human being now" ... ridiculous. Vegas Dave has a sordid history and a whole lot of legal trouble at the moment and he seems to deserve every bit of it and I hope justice is served, but that doesn't mean I'm also going to lie about him and say he was a jerk to me when he was actually nice to me personally ... why would I make myself a liar and a jerk just to harm someone who many consider to be a liar and a jerk? That makes no sense.
    Last edited by Jameis1of1; 05-16-2018 at 01:02 AM.
    I collect true 1/1 autographed RCs of Jameis Winston with my son Hidden Content

    We champions ... through everything that we went through, through all the haters ... we came out victorious. And God did this. Im so blessed.
    Jameis Winston, after winning BCS National Championship game

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


About SCF

    Sports Card Forum provides sports and non-sports card collectors a safe place to discuss, buy, sell and trade.

    SCF maintains tools that will allow collectors to manage their collections online, information about what is happening with the hobby, as well as providing robust data to send out for Autographs through the mail.

Follow SCF on