No good IMO.
Thanks to you both. I can see evidence for both viewpoints. Harrison from the first 'r' onwards is very rushed if it is genuine.
I defer to Mark.
This is not George's signature. Period.
If you think there's a possibility, you're thinking incorrect. No if's, ands or buts about it.
Could be but it's hard to tell. I would pass this one
Let me guess, another one that's coming up for auction.
I don't know Harrison as well as others, but from what I do know, I'd say it's likely good.
What's your aversion to people asking about autographs coming up at auction?
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but isn't helping people before they spend money on bogus autographs one of the great benefits of this site?
There's that side of it, yes.
On the other hand, those of us who have put more hours of our life into studying someone's patterns than we probably should have, don't need to ask. If I have my eye on a certain lot, and someone 1) finds it, and/or 2) bids against me after getting a thumbs up from people who actually know, to my detriment, I don't necessarily like it.
In the present case, let's say you like this Harrison. What if someone drives the bid up who otherwise wouldn't have bid, either because you made them aware of it, or because they saw favorable reviews (which doesn't apply so much to this Harrison, but assume it did). You lost it or at least paid more than you would have had to. That's what I mean...
If you don't need to ask, why bother posting?
If the signature in question is fake, what's the point of all the ridiculous clueless bidding silliness?
Autographyastic posted about it, not me.
As to your second point, I agree.
That's fine, you're entitled to see things how you want. However, your stance essentially opposes the ethos of this website. And nobody is forcing you to post on here.