Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by James R. Altmann on June 2, 2013 at 2:57pm

Hi Jerome. Forgive me if I have this wrong, but the way this forum is set up it takes twists and turns that can be confusing to an old man like myself, but are you suspecting that Jim Officer who started this thread is the Justin Maser that has been referred to by dust-man? Sorry - just trying to get this story straight? If so, this could be the person everyone has been trying to finger for all of the decent Floyd and McCartney forgeries originating from a source in Seattle for many years.

Permalink Reply by Jerome Turner on June 2, 2013 at 7:31pm

Yes I am.  As I pointed out, there are many similarities between him and Jim Officer when reading Jim Officer's past posts, which is now harder to do because he made his profile private, and conveniently after he was outed...

Permalink Reply by Carl Ryan on May 30, 2013 at 3:57pm

I think you should do what you want with the title Steve, but i definetly wouldnt delete the conversation. Its a good record to fall back on should this kinda crap happen again.

Permalink Reply by James R. Altmann on May 30, 2013 at 4:12pm

I agree that this discussion should remain as a public record. Solely based on past discussions and inevitably future ones I am indifferent as to the title change however, as it sets a precedence - UNLESS the rules are going to change for everyone = which I believe they should. Sure, R&R has a lot of pull because they are one of the more known auction houses, but this could happen to any autograph seller or company and they would not have the luxury of such editing. R&R is obviously an advertiser here, but just because an individual does or does not advertise should not make a difference as to how they are treated with titles, in regards to the most certain inevitability of weighted Google returns. I think it would be fine to discuss the validity of a signature in a forum, but titles and discussions should be vetted before going "Live". Just my two cents for the day.

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on May 30, 2013 at 4:28pm

James,

Good comments. We need more rules on the site, period. We edit titles of discussions every now and then, with no special treatment for advertisers. If there were I would have edited this from the beginning. Not that there's anything wrong with editing titles--that's what makes discussions easy to find. For instance, we get lots of titles just saying something like "is this real?" and when I have time I edit the title to mention the item they're asking about.

I have a school open house in a bit, so I won't be online much for a few hours. I'll edit the title for now and we can start working on rules soon, too.

Permalink Reply by James R. Altmann on May 30, 2013 at 4:31pm

That sounds like a great idea to me!

Permalink Reply by mark peterson on May 30, 2013 at 11:57pm

The signatures look good to me.I have met all 4 members and have had all 4 sign for me several times over the years starting with The Wall in 1980 to just a few years ago.I just recently sold a Wall shirt all 4 signed for me.Im still hoping Gilmour will sign one more Pink Floyd item for me someday.

Permalink Reply by Charles Krejci on May 31, 2013 at 6:04pm

looks fine to me , I am no expert but I do have 6 examples of david gilmour 's autograph, the "l" in gilmour is in one motion with no pen break

which seems like a late period autograph, the early autographs seemed very tight and not loose , back hand style "d" and the the dot on "i" in david  also  downword  pen line motion at the end of signature just my thoughts,  I guess thats why there are experts such as Roger or Greig McArthur ,  

Permalink Reply by Darren Ruskin, III on June 1, 2013 at 2:38pm

Wow! Out of the country for a week and the place explodes! Madness!  D

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page