posted 04-15-2004 07:29 PM               

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=13903&item=3908078043

posted 04-15-2004 09:53 PM               

Peaches are not my favorite fruit either.

posted 05-08-2004 05:26 PM               

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14438&item=3911478042&rd=1

posted 05-08-2004 06:11 PM               

The eBay seller is stubborn & uncooperative, but maybe if the source of his item contacts him, he'll do the right thing. It'll be interesting to see if anyone does the right thing.

posted 05-11-2004 01:09 PM               

Continuing with his elaborate come-on, is the following: "A photo almost identical to the one offered here was sold at the R&R Auctions in Jan. for almost $3,000 (This signed photo could be found for $500 just a few years ago!)"

His starting bid of $1,795 and BiN of $2,495 hopefully may be too excessive for it to sell this go-around, but his glowing sales pitch may guarentee the sale eventually.

And so far, no reply from the original seller of this bogus thing nor any sign that the current seller intends to do anything other than continue with his auction. Both original seller & current seller have been contacted.

posted 05-11-2004 03:54 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott:
BTW, weren't there a couple of people on this forum who boasted a month ago that they had been instrumental in exposing and ending all this late 1990s Peachstate Armstrong business (after years of the items being freely sold to unsuspecting collectors)? Have these two contacted the seller or Frohman about this auction? Looks like this whole matter hasn't been taken care of after all.

---

Scott,

This is an absurd statement.

The Peachstate forgeries were exposed and Peachstate was forced to issue a public recall of the signatures. What more do you want? Would you expect those that exposed the Peachstates to physically hunt down and destroy every example? YEARS later we're supposed to still be contacting sellers and Frohman everytime an example surfaces?

At a certain point, buyers have to take responsibility and educate themselves with the information that has been documented by others. Anyone that buys a PS now has no one to blame but himself.

Given your attitude, I presume that if any F2M Armstrongs surface in 5 years, we'll be able to call YOU on it?

posted 05-11-2004 04:02 PM               

Keep up the good work Scott!

Best,

posted 05-11-2004 04:06 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by albatron@aol.com:
Boasted? <LOL> You crack me up. The only boasting I see here is from your neck of the woods. All too often.

Keep up the good work Scott!

Best,

Al

---

Don't mention it, Sock-knocker! Now please go write the seller.

posted 05-11-2004 04:30 PM               

Can you two ever post separately?

I am not trying to be the Armstrong expert, I and others are only willing to do what others should do but won't. Since you bring it up, by the way, I'll say thanks for agreeing to help with the study, then never contributing anything, even when specifically asked to help or contribute.

You see, the problem Steve is that you attacked me publicly on this forum for exposing First2theMoon "too soon" and without discussing it with others first. The problem with that Steve is that I contacted you (and many others) privately multiple times to get your feedback on First2theMoon's Armstrongs (well before any of this became public) but unlike everyone else, *you* never ever replied to me. Your silence was such that I thought perhaps I had your email address wrong. But I checked it again, it was correct and my emails to you never bounced back anyway.

Unbelievably, you and Al had the gall to attack me for my alert concerning First2theMoon, so I believe it is fair to mention that if you want to claim to have taken care of the Peachstate Armstrong mess, then take care of it.

posted 05-11-2004 04:37 PM               

I'm just gonna sit back and watch "the Scott show" now. It's actually kind of funny. Please, send some more.

In the meantime, I'm sure most of the rest of us have more in life than to play games with this nonsense.

Cheers,

posted 05-11-2004 05:08 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott:
I am not trying to be the Armstrong expert, I and others are only willing to do what others should do but won't.

---

"Should do but won't." So, according to you, I "should" spend my life policing ebay auctions? When did I sign up for a lifelong committment? I have a life outside of chat boards, ebay and collecting autographs.

quote:

---

Since you bring it up, by the way, I'll say thanks for agreeing to help with the study, then never contributing anything, even when specifically asked to help or contribute.

---

Scott, first, there is no need to try to embarrass me by making it look like I didn't do something I had committed to do. This is really childish. I had agreed to take a look at the study, but my agreement was conditional and I did express my reservations to you before you even started.

Second, in the past 4 months I got engaged, bought a house, moved my fiance's house 200 miles, moved her mother 200 miles, moved my apartment 200 miles, transferred my job to a new city and am now moving her mother to a new apartment. In all, my personal computer was offline for weeks at a time and I only had access at work. Sorry if your study wasn't at the top of my list of things to do.

And frankly, when I saw your short-tempered, shoot first-ask questions later approach here and elsewhere, I thought it was best to stay away from the project.

But because you asked for it - the drafts I saw were a joke. I wouldn't put my name on them.

Regarding F2M...

I never attacked you, I only responded why some people did not feel comfortable commenting on this matter, AFTER someone slammed "people who have been silent." To this day, I'm not sure some of them are fakes, and unless I have confidence in my opinion, I keep my mouth shut.

I DID respond to a few emails from Bob McLeod which I think you were copied on. My response was "I'm not sure."

quote:

---

I believe it is fair to mention that if you want to claim to have taken care of the Peachstate Armstrong mess, then take care of it.

---

Grow up. You're making a fool of yourself with this ridiculous demand.

posted 05-11-2004 05:35 PM               

I don't mean to beat this to death, but to clear things up, you gave no conditions and the drafts you saw were incomplete and ancient. They were no longer sent to you after awhile because you never replied, gave any feedback or contributed any text or content. Silence. Not even a "Sorry I'm too busy. I cannot help." So your name was taken off. If you thought they were so bad, why didn't you say so at the time?

Regarding your email(s) to Bob you mention, you never copied me on them. The first feedback I saw from you was your *public* post attacking my alert regarding First2theMoon. Steve, what may seem "shoot from the hip" to you was anything but. A great deal of consideration was put into our opinion. We were conservative in that I waited until we received Vivian White's letter before we made it public. It was anything but reckless. It was the right thing to do. And it received no encouragement or help from you.

I don't want a "badge". I don't want anyone to think I'm an "expert". I've never claimed to be an expert. I just don't want to be attacked when I and others are trying to help fellow collectors.