================= Date: 01 Oct 2017 17:33:13 +0000 To: Subject: Desire 1952 Topps Willie Mays From: wmcashton@aol.com ================= Date: 01 Oct 2017 20:48:28 +0000 To: Subject: A few waivers From: jehutch75@gmail.com ================= To: Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 17:59:20 -0400 Subject: 1941 Double Play singles From: "Sal Domino" Found this on Ebay, thought Mike was the one who collected these. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1941-Double-Play-Baseball-Card-Lot-18-Different-Sing &_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649 Sal Domino OBC - 1992 ================= Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 10:52:58 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Football Waivers...Part 2. From: chris tripler Great response to the Football Waivers, here is Part 2 of 3 (one more bunchto post).I'll try toAgain, be sure to thank SEAN MCGOWAN for his passing these cards on to OBC. As we already know, OBC is the best card group, * 1959T #s 89, 105* 1963T #s 26, 27, 155* 1964T #57* 1968T #s 9, 35, 37, 66, 114* 1969T #110* 1970T #s 12, 44 (x2), 61, 67, 89, 125* 1971T Game Cards #32 (x2)* 1973T #s58, 62, 65 (x2), 75, 90, 102, (x2), 105, 108, 111, 116, 120 (x2), 122, 127, 129, 145, 150, 166, 173, 177, 179, 186, 194, 200, 203 (x4), 207 (x2), 213, 219, 226 (x2), 232, 240, 241 (x2), 252, 255 (x3), 256, 260, 264, 283, 284, 286, 287, 300, 304, 318, 321, 325, 334, 339, 354, 361 (x2), 362 (x4), 363, 396, 401, 403, 411, 428, 438, 445 (x2), 469, 485 (x2), 488, 489, 492, 498, 504, 513, 518 (x2) * 1973T Team Cards #s Rams (ck'd), Vikings (unck'd)* 1979T #s 51, 78, 113, 121, 130 (x2), 131, 141, 143 (x2), 144 (x3), 206, 222 (x4), 224 (x2), 233, 280 (x2), 289, 337 (x3), 351, 358 (x2), 374 (x2), 444, 449, 508 (x3), 524 (x2) Enjoy, gentlemen! ================= Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 10:45:52 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: End of last week thanks From: JDahms ================= Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 15:01:24 +0000 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Misc Red Sox sets From: Bob Donaldson Anyone working on the following? 1976 SSPC Red Sox 1976 Star Market ================= Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 15:03:16 +0000 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: 1976 topps From: Bob Donaldson Anyone working on this set? FYI I checked the google spreadsheet ================= Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:01:32 -0400 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1976 topps From: David Luciano Hi Bob, I have a stack if you need any. I only need #1 card. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 2, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Anyone working on this set? FYI I checked the google spreadsheet > Thanks > Bob ================= To: OBC Ramblings , Bob Donaldson Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 20:22:55 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1976 topps From: Aaron Shirley I've got a stack of leftovers too. Who else might be working on this set? From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 10:03 AM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] 1976 topps Anyone working on this set? FYI I checked the google spreadsheet ================= Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 13:53:39 -0700 To: Aaron Shirley Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1976 topps From: John Stamper I'll be starting another 1976 set soon. John Stamper 503 Aspen View Ct. Oak Park, Ca. 91377 > On Oct 2, 2017, at 1:22 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Bob > I've got a stack of leftovers too. Who else might be working on this set? > Aaron > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 10:03 AM > To: OBC Ramblings > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] 1976 topps > Anyone working on this set? FYI I checked the google spreadsheet > Thanks > Bob ================= Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 20:25:41 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Ken M goes to the PO From: Ken M Hi gang,   I dropped off a bunch of envelopes at the post office after work. The clerks usually appreciate it when I approach the counter and say, "Nothing fragile, perishable, liquid, potentially hazardous, lithium battery or perfume." I usually tell them that I mail a lot of stuff after I divulge that I do not work for the post office and decline their subsequent job offer. Today I was asked if I wanted the packages stamped 'Do Not Bend' (after informing her that there were baseball cards in the envelopes). They did get the stamp, even after I assured her that wouldn't be necessary and that the cards were already bent for the most part.  Anyway, packages are going out to everyone who claimed something in my last waiver wire or purchased something from me on the DS server... even if you didn't actually get anything you claimed. If you're dying from anticipation and need me to send you a tracking number, LMK. Or will that just make it more aggravating when they don't updat e it for 24 hours in some cases? Everything got sent First Class, so it should take about three days if you're marking your calendars right now.   I was going to title this "Going Postal". Is that expression even used any more? I can't remember the last time I heard it. In light of the tragic event in Vegas, I scrapped the idea. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.  So as to not end this on a somber note, I'm at the laundomat typing this up. My washing machine had some foolish sensor break on it and refuses to fill (at least according to the self helf websites and videos I watched), so here I am. Every time I come here, I think I should just break down and buy a new washing machine instead of paying for each load here... or get someone to fix the sensor - but who has time for that? At least I didn't drag the kids with me here this time. They LOVE when Daddy brings them to do laundry. I let them bring their tablets and use the free wifi at the l aundromat. One time, they lasted almost thirty seconds before they got bored and wanted to go home. TAYL, Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. ================= To: Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 00:05:48 -0400 Subject: Looking for Reprints From: "Sal Domino" I am moving to a new office at work and they painted it this GOD-AWFUL color, so I need to cover the walls. I would love to take one of my baseball card autograph frames and hang it up there, but I wouldn't risk it. So I decided to get one of those frames and fill it with reprints of cards I own. I need 20 different cards and some I am thinking about are listed. My only criteria is that I have the original card in one of my sets, and it is standard baseball card size. Does anyone have maybe Dodgers archives or some other reprints of the cards below? 52T- Campanella, Jackie, Pee Wee 53T- Jackie, Campy 53B- Pee Wee 67T- Seaver 68T- Ryan 58T- Williams, Mantle 65T- Joe Namath Any Early vertical card of Ed Giacomin 69T - Bud Harrelson 54T- Ted Williams 60T - Yaz Any other suggestions for sets that I have completed? Sal Domino OBC - 1992 ================= Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:43:57 -0400 To: obcbobd@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Misc Red Sox sets From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I am down to the 1976 Star Market Fisk to complete that set. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC Ramblings Sent: Mon, Oct 2, 2017 11:53 am Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Misc Red Sox sets Anyone working on the following? 1976 SSPC Red Sox 1976 Star Market ================= Date: 04 Oct 2017 01:25:14 +0000 To: Subject: 1966 Tulsa Oiliers From: welfar03@yahoo.com ================= Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 21:44:02 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Filling that last spot From: Ken M Hey everyone,   I started my T205 set back in 2001. Somewhere along the way, I bought one of those reprint sets and filled up the binder. As I'd get another one, I'd replace the reprint. Today there are just two reprints left in my binder: Hoblitzell (no stats) and Wallace (no cap, one line of 1910 stats). Those two will likely remain there, since my chance of getting either one is virtually nil. I don't recall even seeing a Hoblitzell. I've seen the Wallace, but it was priced well into four figures (before the decimal point, wise guy). There was, however, one card that wasn't included in the reprint set: Patrick Moran with the stray line of type on the back. It's sat as a blank space all this time, which earned it the #1 spot in my Top Ten most wanted cards list. That run ended today, as I liberated one from it's PSA 1 holder and slid it into it's long awaited place in my binder. A big assist goes to MAC WUBBEN for giving me a heads up that there was a semi-cheap one on eB ay BIN. It was more than I paid for my Cobb, but less than I coughed up for the Joss last year to complete the base set. THANKS MAC!! Now to knock off those last few Polar Bear backs. The search continues... TAYL, Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. ================= Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 01:50:03 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Football Waivers. Part 3. From: chris tripler Last group of football card waivers available for the taking...Claim Away... * 1977 Topps #s 317 (x2), 325, 334, 350 (x2), 356 (x2), 379, 381 (x2), 451 (x3), 515 Griese, 520, 528 SB XI * 1979 Fleer #45* 1980 Topps #s 2 (x3), 4, 7 , 9 (x2), 10 (x2), 11 (x3), 12, 13, 14, 18 (x2), 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30 (x3), 34 (x3), 37, 39, 41 (x2), 42, 43, 46 (x3), 48, 50 (x3), 51, 56 (x3), 59, 60 (x2), 62, 63 (x3), 64 (x2), 66 (x7), 68 (x6), 71, 73 (x2), 74 (x3), 76 (x2), 79 (x3), 81, 82 (x9), 83, 85 (x3), 86, 88 (x4), 91, 96 (x2), 98 (x4), 99 (x3), 375 Thanks, OBC. ================= Date: 04 Oct 2017 02:14:44 +0000 To: Subject: we got rid of From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 22:30:16 -0400 To: Ken M Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Filling that last spot From: Anson Whaley Congrats, Ken - that's quite the achievement. I saw that Moran and you got a good price on it. I got to the 208 'basic' set and stopped before the crazy error cards. The Hoblitzell and Wallace you're pursuing along with the Matty 1-loss Cycle were the three main reasons why :) Awesome job! On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Hey everyone, > I started my T205 set back in 2001. Somewhere along the way, I bought > one of those reprint sets and filled up the binder. As I'd get another one, > I'd replace the reprint. Today there are just two reprints left in my > binder: Hoblitzell (no stats) and Wallace (no cap, one line of 1910 stats). > Those two will likely remain there, since my chance of getting either one > is virtually nil. I don't recall even seeing a Hoblitzell. I've seen the > Wallace, but it was priced well into four figures (before the decimal > point, wise guy). There was, however, one card that wasn't included in the > reprint set: Patrick Moran with the stray line of type on the back. It's > sat as a blank space all this time, which earned it the #1 spot in my Top > Ten most wanted cards list. That run ended today, as I liberated one from > it's PSA 1 holder and slid it into it's long awaited place in my binder. A > big assist goes to MAC WUBBEN for giving me a heads up that there was a > semi-cheap one on eBay BIN. It was more than I paid for my Cobb, but less > than I coughed up for the Joss last year to complete the base set. THANKS > MAC!! Now to knock off those last few Polar Bear backs. The search > continues... TAYL, > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. ================= Date: 05 Oct 2017 16:13:43 +0000 To: Subject: email problem From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 14:17:08 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] email problem From: Ken M Richard,  Sounds like a problem with your email program/computer settings. Unfortunately, I'm not technically savvy enough to tell you how to fix it from here. Just do what I usually do and start looking for/playing around with your settings :-) Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. ------ Original message------From: rlabs1@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Thu, Oct 5, 2017 12:13 PMTo: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com;Cc: Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] email problem I switched from Spectrum to Direct TV and my old elp.rr.com was eliminated. When I try to email individuals it takes me to the old mail and it is disconnected. How do I solve this problem? Thank you. Richard Labs ================= Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 18:55:45 -0700 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: email problem From: Gary Beard How are you trying to read your email, in a browser or with an email client? ================= Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2017 11:01:47 +0000 To: obc ramblings Subject: 1954 Plankinton Ed Mathews on eBay in OBC shape From: Matthew Glidden If you need this regional poster for Eddie and can take it being in 4 pieces, that's a much-lower-than-usual BIN price of $22 total. http://www.ebay.com/itm/1954-Plankinton-Meats-Premium-Milwaukee-Braves-Eddie-Mathews-Regional-TUFF-/132352647401?_trksid=p2141725.m3641.l6368 ================= Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 11:36:38 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: A ramble and an attempt to help another collector From: biggies@aol.com Hello all, So I met a gentleman yesterday who has been collecting for 50+ years and has a nice little collection. He is down sizing so I am going to try and help him get rid of many years. But first there are some sets that he is trying to keep and finish so that is the first thing I'd like to help him with. His name is Vern and he's from North Dakota but lives here in Florida now. The first set I'd like to help him deal with is the 1964 Bazooka Stamps. He collects the full sheets. He has all but sheets 2 and 8. He has for trade sheets 1,3,4,5 and 7. I've seen them and they are in very nice shape. No tears or wrinkles. I've explained to him that he might want to throw in some goodies, and he has plenty, to anyone willing to trade with him to help him finish his sets. He is trying to finish Bazooka sets 1960-1964 and '63 ATG's as well with many dupes to trade. He is also trying to finish 1961-63 Post again with many dupes to trade. I will post these individually in another email. So please let me know if you can do anything with the '64 Stamp sheets. If you don't need any of the other sheets in trade I can probably work something else out for you. Thanks and hope all are well, Bob Bannon ================= Date: 06 Oct 2017 19:10:12 +0000 To: Subject: Hockey Card Question From: ansonwhaley@gmail.com ================= Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 16:01:29 -0400 To: obc Ramblings Subject: Guru Ramble From: LAWRENCE TIPTON My son who lives in New Jersey will be at Walt Disney World on Sunday, and he wants me to visit for a few days and provide childcare for my newest grandson Our local monthly show is Saturday and it=E2=99s south of Jacksonville almost an hour away from me. Then I get notice of a 40 table show in Orlando(which I visited before with good luck) also on Saturday. So I pulled the trigger on a room at the Springhill Suites in Orlando for Saturday night. Saturday I am out the door bright and early for our local show south of town. Then continue south to the 40 table show outside of Orlando. Then Saturday check into hotel and get my workout in maybe enjoy a swim. Sunday make the short drive to Walt Disney World. Sunday Monday Tuesday with Mickey Mouse. I had to renew my Florida Resident Season Pass to WDW (some blackout dates) cost was $446. Last week I returned home from almost a month out in California, and thingsaround here are about normal after hurricane Irma. The Jaguars have been on the road or in London and we have had just one home game so far this year. Looking forward to more home games after this week. Babysitting, baseball cards, Jaguars football that=E2=99s my retirement (not so bad). I=E2=99ll try to type up a card show report tomorrow poolside at my hotel. ================= To: OBC Ramblings Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 04:56:19 +0000 Subject: who sent these? From: Aaron Shirley I'm holding this stack of non-sport cards, and I don't know for certain whosent them. The package they came in is gone. I have my suspicion they camefrom Mike Glasser, but I'd really like to be sure before I post thanks. PLEASE let me know if you're the sender! The cards are: 1977 Charlie's Angels x18 1977 Star Wars x3 1977 Wonder Bread Close Encounters x1 1978 Topps Close Encounters x4 Appreciate any help here! ================= Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 10:14:13 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: HOCKTOBER Offer...Tale of a box from Minnesota... From: chris tripler Morning everyone! Happy Long-weekend (I don't understand why Columbus day is an holiday, I'll take it though). Back early 2016, NICK PELLITIER offered up a 800 count box of skinned ToppsHockey cards that go back to the 1960s to 1980 cards. I was hoping to gluethem to heavy gauge paper after printing off the proper backs...but, life is keeping that from likely happening. Soooo, would anyone like this box? Please give thanks to NICK when you get it.It's about 600-900 skinned cards. Cheers, OBC! ================= Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 09:14:18 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Mars Attacks! An out of this world question, or questions From: Doug DeJong Recently I started collecting the Mars Attacks set from 1962 (because of Gurus bad influence on me), with the expectation it would take a long time tocomplete. However I picked up a couple lots with little duplication thatleave me within three. So if anyone is working on this set and want to trade I need 27, 46, and 52, and have six or seven dupes in nice VG conditionto Also, I am working on the T51 Murad college series cards (blame Anson Whaleys bad influence) and am looking at a large lot that would fill in a numberof the key cards for me but leave me with a lot of duplicates. If anyone is working on these or would like to start and has an interest in possibly splitting a larger lot let me know. Sent from my iPad ================= Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 18:35:23 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Card Show(s) Report From: Larry Tipton Walt Disney World is three hours south of me, enroute to WDW (trip starts tomorrow) I stopped by two card shows. At our local monthly show I didn=E2=99t see much on my first pass. Then in a $3 box I found four =E262 Topps Rookie Parade cards including Pepitone and McDowell a bargain! Bought a =E262 Topps Yogi and Musial in the $3 box too. Last month I bought a stack of =E264 Topps stand ups from this dealer and today I spot a nice stack of exhibit cards and they turn out to be =E262 stat backs. I hand him the stack of 20 (Koufax included) and ask him how much. In my mind I was thinking $100 but he said $70 and tossed in a =E247=E2=93=E264 Aaron exhibit so a bit less than $3.50 each. Also bought a starter set of 1911 T68 Hero=E2=99s of History eight cards for $20 I think. Back on the freeway two hours south for a show I have been to once before just outside of Orlando. My first purchase dealer had several Topps Civil War News cards priced $4 to $8 I said I would buy all he could sell me at $2 each. Dealer said no buthow about $3 each and he sold me 20 vg-ex beauties $3 each for my nine card Dealer had these AFC-NFC scouting cards neither of us knew what they were he said make me an offer. 31 Cards I offered $10 and he accepted turns out they are a 1973 Fleer issue of 14 diff I need =E2=9CDefensive Tackle=E2=9D to complete my set anyone working on this set? 1973 Fleer AFC-NFC Scouting Next found a collector who was selling some of his duplicates and oddballs and I bought quite a bit from him 17 hits =E265 Topps transfers for abuck or two each. Also completed 1968 Topps football stand ups with purchases from him incl a nice Namath $15 I think. Bought a full set of Wonderbread StarWars cards &10 then a whole pile of =E267 Topps =E2=9CWho Am I=E2=9D which turn out to be an early re-issue without the scratch offfronts I need to research these some more but I bought 41 cards so I have some dupes. A few =E277 Topps cloth baseball cards I never did this set still now I am started. One thing I passed on he had full sets =E281 Kellogg=E2=99s and also =E282 Kellogg=E2=99s 3-D full sets mint he bought these back in=E281 he had two =E281 sets and four of five from =E282 $8 per full set prob should have bought these? I checked into my hotel (very nice) hit pool and hot tub also Buffalo Wild wings now back watching football. Sunday Monday Tuesday at Disney! Sent from my iPhone ================= Date: 08 Oct 2017 22:59:42 +0000 To: Subject: Waiver Wire From: mp1067@Hotmail.com ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 20:10:26 -0500 Subject: site down From: mark zentkovich Site has been down for a couple of hours this evening, fyi for the web administrators My error message said site unavailable. Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= Date: 09 Oct 2017 01:55:28 +0000 To: Subject: California visit report From: directorth@aol.com ================= Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 22:21:47 -0400 To: "OBC-Thanks@yahoogroups.com" , Subject: a TRUE obc wow moment From: Cade Doolittle I wasn=E2=99t sure if i should put put this in the ramblings because itsso long or in the thanks because thats what it truly is, so i guess ill just send it to both in hopes that more eyes see it. I=E2=99m sure most of you read a similarly titled email from fellow member Doug Dejong a month or so ago, he rambled on about how I hit some of hislist pretty hard and =E2=9Cunexpectedly=E2=9D and while I appreciatethe thanks from you Doug, you failed to inform this awesome group of the whole Its been so long ago now and my life has been so crazy that I don=E2=99tremember every single date but ill try my best to keep things in order: In mid-late July I got my first house under contract with a closing date ofAugust 25th, the lease I had at my apartment ended July 31st and finding short term rentals in the Asheville area is near impossible, and when you dofind them, they want and arm and a leg per week. So, luckily I have a friend that was willing to let me live in her apartment until I closed on my house. Long story short things didn=E2=99t pan out, some things came up and I was asked to move out within the following 48hrs or so=E2=A6As I prepared to move back to my hometown of Franklin and crash on my mom's couch for the next month, maybe more, my awesome OBC mentor Doug sent me a text just to check in, see how I was doing, how the collecting was going, and see if I was going to the local show the next weekend. I briefly told him aboutmy situation and that collecting had kind of come to a stop recently and Iprobably wouldn=E2=99t make it to the card show. WITHOUT ANY HESITATIONDoug offered me to come stay in his spare bedroom so my daily commute wouldn=E2=99t be so long. (about 20 minutes to my work from Doug=E2=99s house as opposed to an hour and a half from Franklin!) Not only did Doug andhis wife welcome me, a near stranger, into their home for about 3 weeks, they allowed me to bring my 6 month old, rambunctious, wild, crazy, food seeking and destroying, kind of dumb dog to come too, which was a reoccurring problem at nearly every rental opportunity. Doug and his wife were more than generous throughout my stay, I was fed a home cooked meal every night, they walked my dog for me on occasion, Doug gave me at least 3 nice binders to start putting my closer to completed sets in, we order card supplies likebinder pages and card savers together, he loaned me this awesome book called =E2=9CThe Standard Catalog of Vintage Baseball Cards=E2=9D, I didn=E2=99t even know these things existed so if you don=E2=99t have one,GET ONE, because they are awesome! I now own my own copy of the book, which Doug ordered for me. We talked about cards nearly every night and he always had something cool to show me in his collection room, which I still don=E2=99t think i got to see everything. All in all it was a great 3 weeksI spent with awesome people and I=E2=99m pretty sure my dog made best friends with his dog in the meantime, I only hope they enjoyed my company asmuch as I enjoyed theirs, and hopefully Blue and I weren=E2=99t too much of a burden! So heres the biggest, most sincere thanks I could possibly give to my OBC mentor Doug Dejong, and his wife: Thanks for the bed to sleep in at night, the home cooked meals, the home made jams and jellies, the binders and pages for my cards, the vintage catalog, allowing Blue to stay (and eat everything in sight), all the card talks we had, the casual conversations, and the grown up advise you gave, not only for collecting, but for life in general. Thanks for the awesome stories from you childhood, the dog walks almost every evening, and introducing me to your friends, thanks for the Jeopardy games after supper (Doug always won), and everything you taught me along the way, which was more than just about cards, believe me! You and Mary went above and beyond for me in a time of need, and I will always be appreciative of that. You know who to call if you need anything at all and I will try my best to make it happen for you two! Oh, and last but not least, thank you Douglas for giving me the first T-206of my collection!!! My 42 year old self told me I should collect more of these soon! It has been the best house warming gift I have received yet! Cade =E2=9CCadence=E2=9D Doolittle ================= To: "'Cade Doolittle'" , Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:57:08 -0700 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] a TRUE obc wow moment From: "Grant Rainsley" Kudos to Doug D! How typically OBCish of him=E2=A6=E2=A6. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Cade Doolittle cade_doolittle@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: October 8, 2017 7:22 PM To: OBC-Thanks@yahoogroups.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] a TRUE obc wow moment I wasn=E2=99t sure if i should put put this in the ramblings because itsso long or in the thanks because thats what it truly is, so i guess ill just send it to both in hopes that more eyes see it. I=E2=99m sure most of you read a similarly titled email from fellow member Doug Dejong a month or so ago, he rambled on about how I hit some of hislist pretty hard and =E2=9Cunexpectedly=E2=9D and while I appreciatethe thanks from you Doug, you failed to inform this awesome group of the whole Its been so long ago now and my life has been so crazy that I don=E2=99tremember every single date but ill try my best to keep things in order: In mid-late July I got my first house under contract with a closing date ofAugust 25th, the lease I had at my apartment ended July 31st and finding short term rentals in the Asheville area is near impossible, and when you dofind them, they want and arm and a leg per week. So, luckily I have a friend that was willing to let me live in her apartment until I closed on my house. Long story short things didn=E2=99t pan out, some things came up and I was asked to move out within the following 48hrs or so=E2=A6As I prepared to move back to my hometown of Franklin and crash on my mom's couch for the next month, maybe more, my awesome OBC mentor Doug sent me a text just to check in, see how I was doing, how the collecting was going, and see if I was going to the local show the next weekend. I briefly told him aboutmy situation and that collecting had kind of come to a stop recently and Iprobably wouldn=E2=99t make it to the card show. WITHOUT ANY HESITATIONDoug offered me to come stay in his spare bedroom so my daily commute wouldn=E2=99t be so long. (about 20 minutes to my work from Doug=E2=99s house as opposed to an hour and a half from Franklin!) Not only did Doug andhis wife welcome me, a near stranger, into their home for about 3 weeks, they allowed me to bring my 6 month old, rambunctious, wild, crazy, food seeking and destroying, kind of dumb dog to come too, which was a reoccurring problem at nearly every rental opportunity. Doug and his wife were more than generous throughout my stay, I was fed a home cooked meal every night, they walked my dog for me on occasion, Doug gave me at least 3 nice binders to start putting my closer to completed sets in, we order card supplies likebinder pages and card savers together, he loaned me this awesome book called =E2=9CThe Standard Catalog of Vintage Baseball Cards=E2=9D, I didn=E2=99t even know these things existed so if you don=E2=99t have one,GET ONE, because they are awesome! I now own my own copy of the book, which Doug ordered for me. We talked about cards nearly every night and he always had something cool to show me in his collection room, which I still don=E2=99t think i got to see everything. All in all it was a great 3 weeksI spent with awesome people and I=E2=99m pretty sure my dog made best friends with his dog in the meantime, I only hope they enjoyed my company asmuch as I enjoyed theirs, and hopefully Blue and I weren=E2=99t too much of a burden! So heres the biggest, most sincere thanks I could possibly give to my OBC mentor Doug Dejong, and his wife: Thanks for the bed to sleep in at night, the home cooked meals, the home made jams and jellies, the binders and pages for my cards, the vintage catalog, allowing Blue to stay (and eat everything in sight), all the card talks we had, the casual conversations, and the grown up advise you gave, not only for collecting, but for life in general. Thanks for the awesome stories from you childhood, the dog walks almost every evening, and introducing me to your friends, thanks for the Jeopardy games after supper (Doug always won), and everything you taught me along the way, which was more than just about cards, believe me! You and Mary went above and beyond for me in a time of need, and I will always be appreciative of that. You know who to call if you need anything at all and I will try my best to make it happen for you two! Oh, and last but not least, thank you Douglas for giving me the first T-206of my collection!!! My 42 year old self told me I should collect more of these soon! It has been the best house warming gift I have received yet! Cade =E2=9CCadence=E2=9D Doolittle This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com ================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 09:55:09 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Off-HOCKTOBER & Basketball Wiavers... From: chris tripler At the very end of the great card clean up and sending out the HOCKTOBER hits...here's what left...claim away... * 1972-73 #43* 1978-79 #s 59, 140* 1979-80 #146* 1979-80 Poster #Bruins * 1975-76 #323* 1978-79 #s 7, 13, 27, 61, 63, 73, 94* 1979-80 #s 2, 3 (x2),4, 5 (x3), 6, 7 (x2), 8, 9 (x2), 11 (x2), 13, 17 (x3), 21, 22, 23, 28, 29,30, 31, 35, 36, 37 (x2), 38 (x2), 39, 42, 43, 47, 50, 52 (x2), 55, 57, 59, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67 (x2), 68, 71, 72, 73, 74 (x2), 77, 79, 81 (x3), 82 (x2), 84 (x3), 87, 89, 93, 94 (x4), 95 (x2), 99, 101 (x3), 102 (x2), 103,104, 106 (x2), 107 (x2), 109, 111 (x3), 112, 113, 115, 116, 119, 122(x2), 124 (x2), 125, 126 (x2), 127 (x2), 128 (x2), 129, 131 (x3), 132 BASEBALL* 1977 Topps Cloth Puzzle #AL upper right ================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 08:00:57 -0400 To: mzentko@yahoo.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] site down From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I too got the error message. I then went into my saved searches and clicked on the link direct to my wantlists. It took me right there. So if you are just trying to update your lists you may be able to. If you want to look at someone else's list, you may have an issue. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: yahoogroups Sent: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 9:10 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] site down Site has been down for a couple of hours this evening, fyi for the web administrators My error message said site unavailable. Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 13:32:25 -0400 To: Grant Rainsley Subject: Re: [OBC-Thanks] RE: [OBC-Ramblings] a TRUE obc wow moment From: Andy Huntoon Awesome story Cade and Doug. Very OBC. It's not just cards is it guys. Andy Huntoon On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 10:57 PM, 'Grant Rainsley' grains@shaw.ca [OBC-Thanks] wrote: > Kudos to Doug D! How typically OBCish of him=E2=A6=E2=A6. > Grant > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@ > yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Cade Doolittle cade_doolittle@yahoo.com > [OBC-Ramblings] > *Sent:* October 8, 2017 7:22 PM > *To:* OBC-Thanks@yahoogroups.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* [OBC-Ramblings] a TRUE obc wow moment > I wasn=E2=99t sure if i should put put this in the ramblings because its > long or in the thanks because thats what it truly is, so i guess ill just > send it to both in hopes that more eyes see it. > I=E2=99m sure most of you read a similarly titled email from fellow member > Dejong a month or so ago, he rambled on about how I hit some of his list > pretty hard and =E2=9Cunexpectedly=E2=9D and while I appreciate thethanks from you > Doug, you failed to inform this awesome group of the whole story=E2=A6 > Its been so long ago now and my life has been so crazy that I don=E2=99t > remember every single date but ill try my best to keep things in order: > In mid-late July I got my first house under contract with a closing date > of August 25th, the lease I had at my apartment ended July 31st and finding > short term rentals in the Asheville area is near impossible, and when you > do find them, they want and arm and a leg per week. So, luckily I have a > friend that was willing to let me live in her apartment until I closed on > my house. Long story short things didn=E2=99t pan out, some things came up and I > was asked to move out within the following 48hrs or so=E2=A6As I prepared > move back to my hometown of Franklin and crash on my mom's couch for the > next month, maybe more, my awesome OBC mentor Doug sent me a text just to > check in, see how I was doing, how the collecting was going, and see if I > was going to the local show the next weekend. I briefly told him about my > situation and that collecting had kind of come to a stop recently and I > probably wouldn=E2=99t make it to the card show. WITHOUT ANY HESITATION > offered me to come stay in his spare bedroom so my daily commute wouldn=E2=99t > be so long. (about 20 minutes to my work from Doug=E2=99s house as opposed to an > hour and a half from Franklin!) Not only did Doug and his wife welcome me, > a near stranger, into their home for about 3 weeks, they allowed me to > bring my 6 month old, rambunctious, wild, crazy, food seeking and > destroying, kind of dumb dog to come too, which was a reoccurring problem > at nearly every rental opportunity. Doug and his wife were more than > generous throughout my stay, I was fed a home cooked meal every night, they > walked my dog for me on occasion, Doug gave me at least 3 nice binders to > start putting my closer to completed sets in, we order card supplies like > binder pages and card savers together, he loaned me this awesome book > called =E2=9CThe Standard Catalog of Vintage Baseball Cards=E2=9D, I didn=E2=99t even know > these things existed so if you don=E2=99t have one, GET ONE, because they > awesome! I now own my own copy of the book, which Doug ordered for me. We > talked about cards nearly every night and he always had something cool to > show me in his collection room, which I still don=E2=99t think i got to > everything. All in all it was a great 3 weeks I spent with awesome people > and I=E2=99m pretty sure my dog made best friends with his dog in the meantime, > I only hope they enjoyed my company as much as I enjoyed theirs, and > hopefully Blue and I weren=E2=99t too much of a burden! > So heres the biggest, most sincere thanks I could possibly give to my OBC > mentor Doug Dejong, and his wife: > Thanks for the bed to sleep in at night, the home cooked meals, the home > made jams and jellies, the binders and pages for my cards, the vintage > catalog, allowing Blue to stay (and eat everything in sight), all the card > talks we had, the casual conversations, and the grown up advise you gave, > not only for collecting, but for life in general. Thanks for the awesome > stories from you childhood, the dog walks almost every evening, and > introducing me to your friends, thanks for the Jeopardy games after supper > (Doug always won), and everything you taught me along the way, which was > more than just about cards, believe me! > You and Mary went above and beyond for me in a time of need, and I will > always be appreciative of that. You know who to call if you need anything > at all and I will try my best to make it happen for you two! > Oh, and last but not least, thank you Douglas for giving me the first > T-206 of my collection!!! My 42 year old self told me I should collect more > of these soon! It has been the best house warming gift I have received yet! > Sincerely, > Cade =E2=9CCadence=E2=9D Doolittle > > www.avg.com > > <#m_8885681451319150701_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> ================= Date: 09 Oct 2017 23:07:19 +0000 To: Subject: Good deal for Schmidt rookie. From: JTysver1@msn.com ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:05:27 -0500 Subject: in honor of YA Tittle From: mark zentkovich Does anyone know if this is YA in Roman Gabriel=E2=99s 1962 Topps card (left But YA was #14? http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/3208/cid/807568/1962-Topps-88-Roman-Gabriel Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:53:51 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] in honor of YA Tittle From: mark zentkovich http://www.footballcardgallery.com/1962_Topps/88/Roman_Gabriel/ This site says it is YA Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 6:35 PM To: yahoogroups Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] in honor of YA Tittle Does anyone know if this is YA in Roman Gabriel=E2=99s 1962 Topps card (left But YA was #14? http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/3208/cid/807568/1962-Topps-88-Roman-Gabriel Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= Date: 10 Oct 2017 01:01:50 +0000 To: Subject: Check out this guy's Cubs collection From: bdangelo@aol.com ================= Date: 10 Oct 2017 01:24:28 +0000 To: Subject: Redskins & White Sox fans From: bdangelo@aol.com ================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 22:37:33 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Web site down 10/8, service restored From: Wayne Delia I got an email from Network Solutions last night around 9:30PM, saying that our OBC website was suspended due to what they called a "long-running query" tying up resources on their shared service cluster (that's where we are). I leaned on NS to restore the website and managed to get that done earlier this morning. This is the third occurrence of the same problem in the past three months. In no way is it our problem, as all of our program scripts run database queries that usually take less than a second to complete. It's definitely a performance problem on their side. No matter what the problem is, Network Solutions takes the first action of suspending our web site, resulting in the error message you see when you try to load it. To make matters much worse, their system support team requires me to send them an email saying what actions I've taken to solve the problem - without any indication of what the problem is, what scripts need to be changed, or any capability of testing out any changes I make - since both the website and the database are not available for testing when it's suspended. Once I convince the tech support people that again it's not our problem, but their problem, the website usually gets unsuspended, but the database remains down, so critical functions like the Directory won't work. It takes another problem ticket to get the database activated again. I have a document of notes on how to solve these kinds of "problems" - mainly going directly to their support chat line, answering a few security questions (that every OBC'er knows the answers to), and giving them a deadline to get the website back up and running. What seems to work well is to ask for service restoration within 12 hours (they promise 24 to 48 hours to fix problems) or we'll pull the website and move to another web hosting provider. I'll send this document to the OBC/AC, who might find the notes useful in case I'm not available to resolve the problem. The Level-1 help desk might try to "bamboozle us with bullshit" about how the problem is caused by a bad query in our scripts, or a HTML form allowing a virus injection, or a problem with mass emails being sent out - none of that is happening with our program scripts. I tell them I'm a DBA retired from IBM with a quarter century of experience in this area, and I explain why it's their problem and I even offer to help them solve their problem, which is extremely embarrassing for an internet service provider. We should seriously start planning to switch ISP's to some other company, as it seems that Network Solutions platform is having trouble running simple queries on small to medium sized fully-indexed tables (about 5000 records). We get a lot of space, and the price remains reasonable, but we're having these outages with more frequency lately, and we have to jump through hoops to get the service restored. This was a situation of "three strikes, you're out" and last night technically was the third strike. But as the DBA and webmaster for the OBC website, I'd much rather not have to move all the scripts and backup/restore the entire MySQL database. I'm open to suggestions and guidance from the OBC/AC (cough-cough-Joe-Isaac-cough) about where we should go from here. We can most likely get introductory offers from other web service providers with costs competitive to what we're currently paying NS, but the rates may tend to go up after the intro period. Here's an article from PC Magazine about the ten best web hosting services, and Network Solutions didn't even break into the top 10: https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2424725,00.asp , In the meantime, we're back up and running, and talking to our database. ================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 22:43:29 -0400 To: Wayne Delia Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web site down 10/8, service restored From: chris tripler It's the Russians... Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 9, 2017, at 10:37 PM, Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I got an email from Network Solutions last night around 9:30PM, saying that our OBC website was suspended due to what they called a "long-running query" tying up resources on their shared service cluster (that's where we are). I leaned on NS to restore the website and managed to get that done earlier this morning. > This is the third occurrence of the same problem in the past three months. In no way is it our problem, as all of our program scripts run database queries that usually take less than a second to complete. It's definitely a performance problem on their side. No matter what the problem is, Network Solutions takes the first action of suspending our web site, resulting in the error message you see when you try to load it. To make matters much worse, their system support team requires me to send them an email saying what actions I've taken to solve the problem - without any indication of what theproblem is, what scripts need to be changed, or any capability of testing out any changes I make - since both the website and the database are not available for testing when it's suspended. Once I convince the tech support people that again it's not our problem, but their problem, the website usually gets unsuspended, but the database remains down, so critical functions like the Directory won't work. It takes another problem ticket to get the database activated again. > I have a document of notes on how to solve these kinds of "problems" - mainly going directly to their support chat line, answering a few security questions (that every OBC'er knows the answers to), and giving them a deadline to get the website back up and running. What seems to work well is to askfor service restoration within 12 hours (they promise 24 to 48 hours to fix problems) or we'll pull the website and move to another web hosting provider. I'll send this document to the OBC/AC, who might find the notes usefulin case I'm not available to resolve the problem. The Level-1 help desk might try to "bamboozle us with bullshit" about how the problem is caused by a bad query in our scripts, or a HTML form allowing a virus injection, or aproblem with mass emails being sent out - none of that is happening with our program scripts. I tell them I'm a DBA retired from IBM with a quarter century of experience in this area, and I explain why it's their problem andI even offer to help them solve their problem, which is extremely embarrassing for an internet service provider. > We should seriously start planning to switch ISP's to some other company,as it seems that Network Solutions platform is having trouble running simple queries on small to medium sized fully-indexed tables (about 5000 records). We get a lot of space, and the price remains reasonable, but we're having these outages with more frequency lately, and we have to jump through hoops to get the service restored. This was a situation of "three strikes, you're out" and last night technically was the third strike. But as the DBA and webmaster for the OBC website, I'd much rather not have to move all the scripts and backup/restore the entire MySQL database. > I'm open to suggestions and guidance from the OBC/AC (cough-cough-Joe-Isaac-cough) about where we should go from here. We can most likely get introductory offers from other web service providers with costs competitive to what we're currently paying NS, but the rates may tend to go up after the intro period. Here's an article from PC Magazine about the ten best web hosting services, and Network Solutions didn't even break into the top 10: https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2424725,00.asp > In the meantime, we're back up and running, and talking to our database. > Best, > WMD ================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 09:56:34 -0400 To: chris tripler Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web site down 10/8, service restored From: Joel Freedman Wayne, this is pretty simple, when you get sick and tired lack of service from this web hosting service, you will recommend we move to another. :) You are not there yet. P.S. You don't want to move all your pictures. On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 10:43 PM, chris tripler cetripler@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > It's the Russians... > Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 9, 2017, at 10:37 PM, Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com > [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I got an email from Network Solutions last night around 9:30PM, saying > that our OBC website was suspended due to what they called a "long-running > query" tying up resources on their shared service cluster (that's where we > are). I leaned on NS to restore the website and managed to get that done > earlier this morning. > This is the third occurrence of the same problem in the past three months. > In no way is it our problem, as all of our program scripts run database > queries that usually take less than a second to complete. It's definitelya > performance problem on their side. No matter what the problem is, Network > Solutions takes the first action of suspending our web site, resulting in > the error message you see when you try to load it. To make matters much > worse, their system support team requires me to send them an email saying > what actions I've taken to solve the problem - without any indication of > what the problem is, what scripts need to be changed, or any capability of > testing out any changes I make - since both the website and the database > are not available for testing when it's suspended. Once I convince the tech > support people that again it's not our problem, but their problem, the > website usually gets unsuspended, but the database remains down, so > critical functions like the Directory won't work. It takes another problem > ticket to get the database activated again. > I have a document of notes on how to solve these kinds of "problems" - > mainly going directly to their support chat line, answering a few security > questions (that every OBC'er knows the answers to), and giving them a > deadline to get the website back up and running. What seems to work well is > to ask for service restoration within 12 hours (they promise 24 to 48 hours > to fix problems) or we'll pull the website and move to another web hosting > provider. I'll send this document to the OBC/AC, who might find the notes > useful in case I'm not available to resolve the problem. The Level-1 help > desk might try to "bamboozle us with bullshit" about how the problem is > caused by a bad query in our scripts, or a HTML form allowing a virus > injection, or a problem with mass emails being sent out - none of that is > happening with our program scripts. I tell them I'm a DBA retired from IBM > with a quarter century of experience in this area, and I explain why it's > their problem and I even offer to help them solve their problem, which is > extremely embarrassing for an internet service provider. > We should seriously start planning to switch ISP's to some other company, > as it seems that Network Solutions platform is having trouble running > simple queries on small to medium sized fully-indexed tables (about 5000 > records). We get a lot of space, and the price remains reasonable, but > we're having these outages with more frequency lately, and we have to jump > through hoops to get the service restored. This was a situation of "three > strikes, you're out" and last night technically was the third strike. But > as the DBA and webmaster for the OBC website, I'd much rather not have to > move all the scripts and backup/restore the entire MySQL database. > I'm open to suggestions and guidance from the OBC/AC > (cough-cough-Joe-Isaac-cough) about where we should go from here. We can > most likely get introductory offers from other web service providers with > costs competitive to what we're currently paying NS, but the rates may tend > to go up after the intro period. Here's an article from PC Magazine about > the ten best web hosting services, and Network Solutions didn't even break > into the top 10: https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2424725,00.asp , > In the meantime, we're back up and running, and talking to our database. > Best, > WMD ================= To: obc-thanks@yahoogroups.com, Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:37:38 -0400 Subject: final ..I think...thanks for the 65-9s From: ED SCHOTT thanks again to Mac for the final Mantle and Sir Stevie Rittenberg for the last "whole" Carlton and all y'all who helped over the last 9 years -------- Forwarded Message -------- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:31:27 -0400 From: easchott@comcast.net To: easchott@comcast.net ================= To: OBC Ramblings Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 08:45:41 -0400 Subject: License Plate From: Don Rice Posting here in lieu of the thanks server so as not to flaunt the rules about posting non-vintage card thanks there. A week or two ago I put out a call for license plates, /any /license plates, to adorn the wall of my man-cave garage. MARSHALL WEST answered my call with a great lookin' Utah plate, where it looks like I should ski, because according to the plate they have the "Greatest Snow on Earth!" Thanks Marshall... this is going up right away! Don Rice This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:29:28 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Chantilly This Weekend! I need Help! From: Jake Brewer If anyone is going to Chantilly this weekend, and would help a brother out-one of my dreams just became a possibility! My FAVORITE movie of all-time is The Sandlot. I've talked about it before how it holds a special place in my collecting history, its ties to my Nanny,etc. Well FIVE of the actors are going to be at Chantilly this weekend- and I cant go :/ If someone were to get them for me, this is what I'm looking for: I'd like to get an single-signed autograph baseball of each of these guys on the sweet spot: Brandon Quintin Adams ($25): with inscription: "Kenny DeNunez" Then part of "The Sandlot Super Ticket" ($80): Marty York- with inscription "Yeah-Yeah" Victor DiMattia- with inscription "Timmy" Shane Obedzinski- with inscription "Tommy" Chauncey Leopardi- with inscription "Squints" I'd pay for the price of the autographs, some ROMLBs, shipping, and a consignment If anyone can help, email me! -Jake "The Kid" Brewer Sent from my iPhone ================= Date: 11 Oct 2017 20:11:47 +0000 To: Subject: Some waiver availables From: jehutch75@gmail.com ================= To: "'OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com'" Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 20:59:18 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] final ..I think...thanks for the 65-9s [2 Attachments] From: "Sal Domino" At least this will be easy to spot any gremlins ;-) Sal Domino OBC - 1992 From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ED SCHOTT easchott@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 12:38 AM To: obc-thanks@yahoogroups.com; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] final ..I think...thanks for the 65-9s [2 [Attachment(s) from ED SCHOTT included below] thanks again to Mac for the final Mantle and Sir Stevie Rittenberg for the last "whole" Carlton and all y'all who helped over the last 9 years -------- Forwarded Message -------- Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:31:27 -0400 ================= Date: 12 Oct 2017 03:11:07 +0000 To: Subject: I got some splaining to do... From: b_betza@yahoo.com ================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 23:44:48 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Chantilly show this weekend From: Wayne Delia I just heard from Dave Estright, he and his wife will be setting up at Chantilly. Dave tells me he's got about TWENTY THOUSAND of those VG stars, superstars, and high numbers, he's finished pricing about half of them at 5% of book and may or may not be able to get to do the rest before the show. If you're going, find his table and snag yourself some great deals. ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 09:25:52 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Postage / weight question From: Bob Donaldson Going to be selling some larger lots of more recent cards (76-82). Unsure of what the postage costs would be. Does anyone know the weight of the following? They are too big for my postage scale and too small for the bathroom scale 800 ct box full of cards 550 ct box full of cards ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:29:57 -0400 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Postage / weight question From: Joel Freedman Bob, i recommend you go to the post office and grab thier packaging. Depending upon the box size, small medium or large, the cost is the same. The small box is ~ 7, the medium box is ~13 the large box is ~20. On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hi > Going to be selling some larger lots of more recent cards (76-82). Unsure > of what the postage costs would be. Does anyone know the weight of the > following? They are too big for my postage scale and too small for the > bathroom scale > 800 ct box full of cards > 550 ct box full of cards > thanks > Bob ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:59:33 -0400 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Postage / weight question From: chris tripler If USPS, it's by zone. For a full 800 count box it's about $8 within zone (e.g. MA to MA) if to California about $15. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 12, 2017, at 9:25 AM, Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hi > Going to be selling some larger lots of more recent cards (76-82). Unsure of what the postage costs would be. Does anyone know the weight of the following? They are too big for my postage scale and too small for the bathroom > 800 ct box full of cards > 550 ct box full of cards > thanks > Bob ================= To: Joel Freedman , Bob Donaldson Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 09:58:58 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Postage / weight question From: mark zentkovich Along the same lines, I use flat rate padded envelopes as my favorite way to ship lots of that size I can fit two 300 ct boxes in there and ships for about 7.00 All local post offices don=E2=99t have them so you may have to order online Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Joel Freedman jefreedman1@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 9:30 AM To: Bob Donaldson Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Postage / weight question Bob, i recommend you go to the post office and grab thier packaging. Depending upon the box size, small medium or large, the cost is the same. The small box is ~ 7, the medium box is ~13 the large box is ~20. On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: Going to be selling some larger lots of more recent cards (76-82). Unsure of what the postage costs would be. Does anyone know the weight of the following? They are too big for my postage scale and too smallfor the bathroom scale 800 ct box full of cards 550 ct box full of cards ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:49:49 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: Postage / weight question From: Bob Donaldson Thanks for some good answers. I got the actual answer to my questions at the post office. I took two full boxes of cards and had them weighed. An 800 ct box was 3 lbs 8.3 oz and a 550 ct box was 2 lbs 8 ozs. I then used the USPS.com website to calculate postage 800ct box is a large package (15 x 3 x 4) First class was not an option, but priority was to send within Mass. was $8.50 to send to California was $20.05 The 550 box could go as a normal package (no side > 12") to send within Mass. was $7.80 to send to California was $17.15 However, if I packaged the cards in a medium flat rate box (I could squeeze 3 550 ct boxes) the price was the same $13.60 for shipping to Mass. or I will also order some flat rate padded envelopes as suggested by Mark Z. thanks everyone, especially Joel, Mark Z, Mark M and Trips On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Bob Donaldson wrote: > Hi > Going to be selling some larger lots of more recent cards (76-82). Unsure > of what the postage costs would be. Does anyone know the weight of the > following? They are too big for my postage scale and too small for the > bathroom scale > 800 ct box full of cards > 550 ct box full of cards > thanks > Bob ================= To: Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:56:54 -0500 Subject: Exhibit Supply Co article From: "George Vrechek" A new article has been posted on our library page http://www.oldbaseball.com/refs/Exhibit_Supply_Cards.pdf which covers some history of the Exhibit Supply Company and their sports cards. It just ran in Sports Collectors Digest. There is also a master checklist of ESCO baseball cards that I can send you as a pdf, if you are interested in the obscure variations, and if you haven't already received one from me. George Vrechek ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:21:20 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: 1958 topps From: JDahms ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 18:09:35 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: Ken M JD,  Cross off #145. It was never issued. Put the felt pennant insert there instead :-) Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. ------ Original message------From: JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Thu, Oct 12, 2017 4:21 PMTo: Obc Ranblings;Cc: Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps I am getting so close on my 1958 topps baseball set. Was hoping maybe someone or someone's might be able to help me out before I do ebay.  Of course I will reciprocate as I can. Thanks in advance 74(bert rechichar)  145(ed bouchee) 185(ray boone) 270(warren spahn) 355(bill bruton) 386(birdies young sluggers) 495(herb score AS) Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 18:43:37 -0400 To: Ken M , "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: JDahms ================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 19:12:09 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: Ken M ================= To: JDahms Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 23:47:26 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: JAY TYSVER ================= To: JAY TYSVER , JDahms Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 11:40:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: ED SCHOTT 1958 topps Baltimore Colts football card On 10/12/2017 7:47 PM, JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Not sure who Bert Rechichar is. #74 is Roy Face. > Cross these four off the list... They're on the way. > #74 > #185 > #355 > #386 > Jay Tysver > On Oct 12, 2017, at 5:43 PM, JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com > [OBC-Ramblings] > > wrote: >> Thanks Ken. What felt pennant insert? >> Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: "Ken M cardclctor@aol.com >> [OBC-Ramblings]" > > >> Date: 10/12/17 6:09 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps >> JD, >> Cross off #145. It was never issued. Put the felt pennant insert >> there instead :-) >> Ken M >> Sent from my not so smart phone. >> ------ Original message------ >> *From: *JDahmsjd3681@yahoo.com >> [OBC-Ramblings] >> *Date: *Thu, Oct 12, 2017 4:21 PM >> *To: *Obc Ranblings; >> *Cc: * >> *Subject:*[OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps >> I am getting so close on my 1958 topps baseball set. Was hoping maybe >> someone or someone's might be able to help me out before I do ebay. >> Of course I will reciprocate as I can. >> Thanks in advance >> JD >> 74(bert rechichar) >> 145(ed bouchee) >> 185(ray boone) >> 270(warren spahn) >> 355(bill bruton) >> 386(birdies young sluggers) >> 495(herb score AS) >> Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:38:46 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1958 topps From: Aaron Shirley So is this where the list stands for JD's 1958 Topps set? 270 (warren spahn) 495 (herb score AS) ================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 15:36:39 -0600 To: OBC-Ramblings Subject: Tin for Tin From: Marshall West DON RICE sent me a =E2=9Cgrundle=E2=9D of Coke caps. And all I sent him was one measly old Utah License plate. Even though it doesn't seem like a fair deal for DON, I guess I=E2=99ll just have to keep going somehow. Thanks a million DON! I love the caps, and I keep imagining you looking just like the skier on the license plate=E2=A6.. Marshall West ================= Date: 14 Oct 2017 17:34:07 +0000 To: Subject: Waiver Wire Update From: mp1067@Hotmail.com ================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 21:17:19 -0700 To: Thanks OBC , Subject: Huge Thanks From: John Stamper Last Saturday night Karyn and I went to see the one man play Mungo, by Peter Iversen. We were drawn back in time to the 1930's as if Van Lingle Mungo was right there telling us his life story. By the end of the performance I was tearing up. What a powerful story!! Very well written and performed. Looking forward to the book. John Stamper ================= Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 07:24:44 -0400 To: holidayandhobbies@yahoo.com, OBC-Thanks@yahoogroups.com, Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Huge Thanks From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Peter needs to take the show on the road. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: John Stamper holidayandhobbies@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: Thanks OBC ; Ramblings OBC Sent: Sun, Oct 15, 2017 12:17 am Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Huge Thanks Last Saturday night Karyn and I went to see the one man play Mungo, by Peter Iversen. We were drawn back in time to the 1930's as if Van Lingle Mungo was right there telling us his life story. By the end of the performance I was tearing up. What a powerful story!! Very well written and performed. Looking forward to the book. John Stamper ================= Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 05:34:27 -0700 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Huge Thanks From: John Stamper I agree. Everyone should experience Mungo. And bring a friend!! It's that good. John Stamper > On Oct 15, 2017, at 4:24 AM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Peter needs to take the show on the road. > Mike Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: John Stamper holidayandhobbies@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > To: Thanks OBC ; Ramblings OBC > Sent: Sun, Oct 15, 2017 12:17 am > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Huge Thanks > Last Saturday night Karyn and I went to see the one man play Mungo, by Peter Iversen. We were drawn back in time to the 1930's as if Van Lingle Mungo was right there telling us his life story. By the end of the performance I was tearing up. What a powerful story!! Very well written and performed. Looking forward to the book. > John Stamper ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 18:40:44 -0500 Subject: need semi rigid holders From: mark zentkovich If anyone can spare a puffy full or half full of semi rigid holders, I would appreciate it I would hate to buy new ones just to use to ship out stuff, but I will if needed. Mix of regular size and 52-56 size would be cool I have plenty of the more rigid ones Thanks, mark zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 20:58:24 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: Thanks to Mike Glasser From: JDahms ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:46:05 -0500 Subject: FW: [OBC-Ramblings] need semi rigid holders From: mark zentkovich Thanks for the responses, I have a bunch coming in the mail Thank you OBC Mark Z On Oct 15, 2017, at 5:40 PM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: If anyone can spare a puffy full or half full of semi rigid holders, I would appreciate it I would hate to buy new ones just to use to ship out stuff, but I will if needed. Mix of regular size and 52-56 size would be cool I have plenty of the more rigid ones Thanks, mark zentkovich Sent fromMailfor Windows 10 ================= Date: 17 Oct 2017 02:32:49 +0000 To: Subject: Young A's collector From: tvalacak@comcast.net ================= To: tvalacak@comcast.net, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:44:36 -0400 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: ED SCHOTT already putting together a 600 count box for the little guy C'mon boys... lets make this kid happy On 10/16/2017 10:32 PM, tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hey gang, > I came across this story today. A young Oakland A's collector, nine > years old,, lost his collection in the fires out west. The A's are > gathering a care package to send to this youngster, Loren. I emailed a > person from the A's, and she said that they will be putting together a > care package for Loren over the next week or so. I'm not sure if he > was into any vintage, but I am sure he would appreciate anything. If > you have some uv A's sitting around, I think Loren would welcome > them. I have attached a copy of the story, which includes an address > of where you can send some cards or memorabilia to Loren. > TJ > https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/nine-year-old-fan-saddened-loss-cards-autographs-fire/ ================= Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 20:48:36 -0700 To: ED SCHOTT Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: John Stamper Have a puffy stuffed and ready to go including some A's Auto cards. John Stamper > On Oct 16, 2017, at 8:44 PM, ED SCHOTT easchott@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > already putting together a 600 count box for the little guy > C'mon boys... lets make this kid happy >> On 10/16/2017 10:32 PM, tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Hey gang, >> I came across this story today. A young Oakland A's collector, nine years old,, lost his collection in the fires out west. The A's are gathering a care package to send to this youngster, Loren. I emailed a person from the A's, and she said that they will be putting together a care package for Loren over the next week or so. I'm not sure if he was into any vintage, but I am sure he would appreciate anything. If you have someuv A's sitting around, I think Loren would welcome them. I have attached a copy of the story, which includes an address of where you can send some cards or memorabilia to Loren. >> TJ >> https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/nine-year-old-fan-saddened-loss-cards-autographs-fire/ ================= Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:55:09 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: 1976 Isaly's discs From: Ken M   So the other day I started some new sets with the intent of putting something on my list that would be easier for others to find. I may have made some of them a little TOO easy to hit... One of the additions was a 1976 disc mixed four set project. A bunch of different companies issued 70 player sets in 1976 (there are blank backs as well). I had originally intended to collect four of each player regardless of the back, as long as it was part of the 70 card set. I may have to break it up into individual sets after today though. I put a pretty big hurt on my four set project with some idle time searching eBay. I came across a group lot of "160+ Isaly's discs, 40+ different players w/stars". The description lists it as four discs each for 43 listed players. BIN for the princely sum of $15 dlvd. I also scooped up four other cheap lots of mostly stars/HOF'ers. Bad news is I don't need too many of the Isaly's discs now. Good news is I should have a bunch to swap out or trade if you have any of the other backs. I stopped before I bought any of the 1977 discs... Maybe next week ;-) TAYL Ken M - I also made an offer and picked up a 1979 Hostess lot with the Carew variation plus most kif not all) of the short prints I needed for that set. Four left now.  100(Montanez) 102(Ozzie RC) 115(Murray) 145(Eck) Sent from my not so smart phone. ================= Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 21:38:38 -0600 To: tvalacak@comcast.net Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: Marshall West My Oakland cards are already in our mailbox for pickup tomorrow. I =E2=9Cstarted=E2=9D collecting when I was 9, and this story crushed me. I hope we can help this little guy. Thank you for the link, Marshall West > On Oct 16, 2017, at 8:32 PM, tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] > Hey gang, > I came across this story today. A young Oakland A's collector, nine years old,, lost his collection in the fires out west. The A's are gathering acare package to send to this youngster, Loren. I emailed a person from theA's, and she said that they will be putting together a care package for Loren over the next week or so. I'm not sure if he was into any vintage, butI am sure he would appreciate anything. If you have some uv A's sitting around, I think Loren would welcome them. I have attached a copy of the story, which includes an address of where you can send some cards or memorabilia to Loren. > TJ > https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/nine-year-old-fan-saddened-loss-cards-autographs-fire/ ================= Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:17:23 -0400 To: marshall@marshallwest.com, tvalacak@comcast.net Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: hoot_owl1@verizon.net I just need to get to the post office! -----Original Message----- From: Marshall West marshall@marshallwest.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: tvalacak Cc: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Tue, Oct 17, 2017 9:58 am Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector My Oakland cards are already in our mailbox for pickup tomorrow. I =E2=9Cstarted=E2=9D collecting when I was 9, and this story crushed me. I hope we can help this little guy. Thank you for the link, Marshall West On Oct 16, 2017, at 8:32 PM, tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] Hey gang, I came across this story today. A young Oakland A's collector, nine years old,, lost his collection in the fires out west. The A's are gathering a care package to send to this youngster, Loren. I emailed a person from the A's, and she said that they will be putting together a care package for Loren over the next week or so. I'm not sure if he was into any vintage, but Iam sure he would appreciate anything. If you have some uv A's sitting around, I think Loren would welcome them. I have attached a copy of the story, which includes an address of where you can send some cards or memorabiliato https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/nine-year-old-fan-saddened-loss-cards-autographs-fire/ ================= Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:22:47 -0400 To: hoot_owl1@verizon.net, marshall@marshallwest.com, tvalacak@comcast.net Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: JDahms ================= Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:27:49 -0400 To: jd3681@yahoo.com, hoot_owl1@verizon.net, marshall@marshallwest.com, Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: mikesportsfan@aol.com The address was in the article: Oakland Athletics Attn: A's Community for Loren 7000 Coliseum Way Oakland, CA 94621 -----Original Message----- From: JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: hoot_owl1 ; marshall ; tvalacak Cc: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Tue, Oct 17, 2017 12:23 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector Where are we sending these cards? Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S=AE 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: "hoot_owl1@verizon.net [OBC-Ramblings]" Date: 10/17/17 11:17 AM (GMT-05:00) To: marshall@marshallwest.com, tvalacak@comcast.net Cc: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector I just need to get to the post office! -----Original Message----- From: Marshall West marshall@marshallwest.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: tvalacak Cc: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Tue, Oct 17, 2017 9:58 am Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector My Oakland cards are already in our mailbox for pickup tomorrow. I =E2=9Cstarted=E2=9D collecting when I was 9, and this story crushed me. I hope we can help this little guy. Thank you for the link, Marshall West On Oct 16, 2017, at 8:32 PM, tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] Hey gang, I came across this story today. A young Oakland A's collector, nine years old,, lost his collection in the fires out west. The A's are gathering a care package to send to this youngster, Loren. I emailed a person from the A's, and she said that they will be putting together a care package for Loren over the next week or so. I'm not sure if he was into any vintage, but Iam sure he would appreciate anything. If you have some uv A's sitting around, I think Loren would welcome them. I have attached a copy of the story, which includes an address of where you can send some cards or memorabiliato https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/nine-year-old-fan-saddened-loss-cards-autographs-fire/ ================= Date: 17 Oct 2017 18:25:26 +0000 To: Subject: John Titus T205 print mark help From: ansonwhaley@gmail.com ================= Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 21:59:14 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: A bit of a hobby ramble....no more dealin' and more.... From: Jim Thayer Hey guys, A lot has been going on here over the last few months from my wife's health, to both kids now in the middle school, and to me saying goodbye to the dealer-side of my life. Well....sorta. I've already spoken to a couple guys in OBC about the possibility of movingon from dealing. Truth is this.....I miss collecting, and being a dealer (although a lot of fun) isn't paying the bills. Instead, I'll bemoving on from dealing soon. My partner, Bryan, is having a lot of success the last few months buying and selling newer boxes and cases, and I couldn't be happier about that! We are in a bit of a transition, although, I can't see that we will be dropping vintage altogether. So whydo I say I'm leaving dealing, but yet using "we" when talking about our business? Well, he's still my best friend, as we have been since the 8th grade, and although he knows my current desires in the hobby, I can't just leave him hanging. I still have inventory here to list, and a few loose ends to take care of, but I am pretty excited about moving on. Straight up....I miss collecting! Soon I will be 100% out of it, and back in the collecting world fulltime. It's also VERY difficult to do both, I might add!! This also means.....no income. I need to get serious about finding a job, even if it's a part time gig somewhere in order to generate some cash for the family. I'm a bit nervous about the whole thing, but I know in my heart that good things will happen soon. What about my collection?! I'm considering doing what Geno did years ago, and just drop everything and go after one goal....as difficult as thatsounds. I love all kinds of things, so it'll be difficult to lay offof those temptations! So, my plan is to focus ALMOST solely on my HOF Collection. I love the research that goes with it, and I love obtaining hard-to-find cards. I will continue to collect the 1978 Topps 9-pocket project that so many of you have helped me with, but I'm not too sure about the future of my 1978 Topps all-AUTO set just yet. I'm considering selling/trading some of them, and I'm considering the same for everything else on my site. I wish I had the budget to collect everything from 1863 to 2017, but I don't, and quite frankly I'm tired of anything shiny. So, expect the UV page to disappear for sure. Be on the lookout for a few Dealer Scum items to show up, and some trade-ables and waiver wires. It's about to get real here! :) Some things that might going soon either by sale, trade, RAOKs, or waiver wires are....- Negro League premiums- starter sets from 1954 Bowman, 1955 Topps, 1957 Topps, 1968 Milton Bradley, and 1958 Topps on up through 1980 Topps- complete sets of 1966 East Hills, 1978 OPC, 1978 Zest, and a few others- 1978 Topps AUTOs, non-sports cards, UV cards, other sports- probably a lot I know Bill Ashton is doing a HOF Collection, but I wish others were doing something similar as we could really help each other out. If anyone is interested in doing so, I can send you to some of the resources I use. Lots of fun, and who doesn't like having HOFers in their collection? Thanks for reading this far. Have a great evening! ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:11:56 +0000 Subject: Thoughts on this ruth? From: Mac Wubben (posted this on net54 as well) Any thoughts on this blank back ruth? The card stock seems a bit thicker and the image seems a bit smaller. Was thereever a display of this card? Hoping to sell, but would like confirmation that it's real first. Thanks for any and all input. ================= Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 21:55:24 -0400 To: obcmac@hotmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Thoughts on this ruth? [2 Attachments] From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I'm thinking printer's proof. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: yahoogroups Sent: Tue, Oct 17, 2017 8:12 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Thoughts on this ruth? [2 Attachments] [Attachment(s) from Mac Wubben included below] (posted this on net54 as well) Any thoughts on this blank back ruth? The card stock seems a bit thicker and the image seems a bit smaller. Was thereever a display of this card? Hoping to sell, but would like confirmation that it's real first. Thanks for any and all input. ================= Date: 18 Oct 2017 02:00:45 +0000 To: Subject: Healing power of cardboard needed From: mikesportsfan@aol.com ================= Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 09:11:53 -0400 To: obc Ramblings Subject: Gurus Wauction #12 From: LAWRENCE TIPTON Gurus =E2=9CWauction=E2=9D #12 (A combination =E2=9CWaiver-Wire=E2=9D and =E2=9CAuction=E2=9D) rules: send me a private email message telling me what lot number/numbers you would like to have. No limit of how many lots you request, but you can only win one lot. I=E2=99ll keep track of who is interested in each lot, and pull one namefrom the splatter cover that sits on my microwave oven. Gurus =E2=9CWauction=E2=9D ends this Sunday at 6AM EST, with =E2=9CWauction Winners=E2=9D The =E2=9CWauction=E2=9D catalog has already been published on the OBC Facebook page. **PLEASE NOTE: LOT 9 IS A SUBSTITUTE FROM WHAT WAS PICTURED ON FACEBOOK! The original lot #9 was a 1963 Topps baseball card #173 =E2=9CBombers Best=E2=9D. Then I remembered there is a variation on this card involving the knob of the bat that is between Mickeys legs, and confirmed with Richard Dingmans variation checklist. The card in my set has the dark shadow, this wauction card does not have the shadow. So I pulled the wauction card, and now have both variations in my set.** 1. 1961 Topps baseball #300 Mickey Mantle. Perfectly centered front and reverse! The card appears to have been taped into an album, and removal has left some residue and damage on three sides of the front. Iconic card of Mantle! 2. 1960 Topps baseball #148 Carl Yastrzemski RC. On consignment from Dan England, this card is magnificent! A large scratch on the front of the card is the only major flaw we can detect! Centering is OK on both sides, and onecorner is dinged. Really, any collector would be glad to have this card intheir set. It=E2=99s a BEAUTY! 3. 1962 Topps baseball #318 =E2=9CThe Switch Hitter Connects=E2=9D with Mickey Mantle. Part of the nine card =E2=9CIn Action=E2=9D series,Topps hit a home run with this subset! Lower grade example has one creasedcorner, but displays no paper loss at all. This card does have rounded corners and the typical edge chipping you see on these wood grained cards. 4. 1961 Topps baseball #401 =E2=9CBabe Ruth Hits 60th Homer=E2=9D This ten card subset, =E2=9CBaseball Thrills=E2=9D, was a HUGE hit when released! Although this example has an off centered front, the white borders ARE visible on all sides. The thumbtack hole just above Ruths cap doesn=E2=99t detract. This photo will appear in Topps release next year as part of the Babe Ruth subset (see lot #7). 5. 1965 Topps baseball #3 =E2=9CAL Home Run Leaders=E2=9D. Killebrew hit 49, Boog Powell hit 39, and Mickey Mantle hit 35. These are the playersfeatured on the front. Well centered card would be an upgrade for most of the crowd here! 6. 1962 Post Cereal baseball #5 Mickey Mantle (Life Magazine Promo Card) The April 13 1962 cover of Life magazine pictured Richard Burton and Liz Taylor on the set of the film =E2=9CCleopatra=E2=9D. Inside the magazine was an add for Post Cereal baseball cards, including free cards of Mantle and Maris. This =E2=9Cinked=E2=9D card features Mickey smoking a cigarette, and sporting a =E2=9CVan Dyke=E2=9D style beard. 7. 1962 Topps baseball #139 =E2=9CBabe Hits 60=E2=9D is the key to the popular ten card =E2=9CBabe Ruth Special=E2=9D subset! Normal =E2=9Cwood-grain=E2=9D chipping, with lower left corner damage, but no paper loss at all. This is NOT the =E2=9Cgreen-tint=E2=9D version, because I don=E2=99t see a pole, and the dirt is brown LOL! A BEAUTY! 8. 1962 Topps baseball #596 =E2=9CRookie Parade=E2=9D infielders Bernie Allen, Rich Rollins, Phil Linz, and Joe Pepitone! G-VG with a couple of creases, and some random pencil marks on the front. This highly sought after card from the difficult high numbered series is on everyones wantlist! 9. 1961 Nu-Card Baseball Scoops #450 =E2=9CMantle Hits Longest Homer Of The Season=E2=9D. On May 30th 1955 Mickey Mantle accomplished a first atYankee Stadium. He hit a fair ball OUT of the stadium, a feat not even theBabe himself could boast! His blast hit the right field facade at the verytop of the roof while STILL rising! This is one of the key cards to the set, and if you can overlook the three tape stains on the reverse, it=E2=99s a solid G-VG example! 10. 1963 Topps baseball #3 =E2=9CNL Home Run Leaders=E2=9D. G-VG example with nice centering, and no paper loss! THIS CARD FEATURES FIVE HALL OFFAMERS! Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Frank Robinson, Ernie Banks, and Orlando Cepeda! ================= Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 09:35:37 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Any set killers? From: Rob Bessette Hi guys I just cashed in some eBay bucks about bought a 59 Maris gray back for my white/gray back variation quest. Leaves me needing one card - Hank Bauer gray back. Anyone have one to trade? Got a lot of stuff I could swap. Go Yankees!!!! ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" , "Rob Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:17 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Any set killers? From: Mac Wubben On the way... (always should include the # and name of the card you are looking for...Rule #1 of short list requests) From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Rob Bessette robsbessette@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 9:35 AM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Any set killers? Hi guys I just cashed in some eBay bucks about bought a 59 Maris gray back for my white/gray back variation quest. Leaves me needing one card - Hank Bauer gray back. Anyone have one to trade? Got a lot of stuff I could swap. Go Yankees!!!! ================= Date: 18 Oct 2017 22:19:40 +0000 To: Subject: What do you find? From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:48:48 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: OBCer Sighting From: EEK I just saw a Bob D'Angelo post on TBS: "Loved when @garysheffield gave "the stare" during the #NLCS pregame show. Reminds me of the look he gaveopposing pitchers when batting. #Tampa. I agree Bob!Earl "EEK" Kilbourn "we keep what we give away!" ================= Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:53:06 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: OBCer Sighting II From: EEK I missed the quotation marks at the end. He didn't say "I agree Bob", I said that. Make sense? Earl "EEK" Kilbourn "we keep what we give away!" ================= Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:59:51 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Pistons game From: EEK Anyone watching the Pistons game? My Granddaughter's significant other, Manny Torres, sang the national anthem before the game.Earl "EEK" Kilbourn "we keep what we give away!" ================= Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:05:35 -0700 To: rlabs1@yahoo.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What do you find? From: wite3 ================= Date: 19 Oct 2017 01:48:53 +0000 To: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What do you find? From: james_moleta@hotmail.com ================= Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:56:09 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: 1978 Topps gremlin alert From: Doug DeJong I decided to put a few of my late 1970 sets into boxes versus the binders and realized I am missing one 1978 card.....number 560 Dave Parker? Anyonehave an extra lymph no around? Also this set is pretty much Ex or betterwith a few VG cards, but I found two train wrecks that I would love to upgrade...common cards 339 and 426 if anyone had either of those. Thanks for considering......Doug Sent from my iPad ================= Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:29:17 -0700 To: OBC Subject: Oh. My. God. From: Geordie Calvert As one of the resident Dodger fans in OBC, I=E2=99m close to being on top of the world right now. The top, hopefully, is still to come. Don=E2=99t want to get ahead of myself - four wins to go. I=E2=99m having a bit of trouble processing that the Dodgers are finallyback in the World Series. Naw, that=E2=99s a big ol=E2=99 lie! I=E2=99m still dancing and sporting an ear-splitting goofy-ass grin! ================= To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" , "Mac Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:07:44 +0000 Subject: Site down again? From: Mac Wubben Couldn't get to site this morning. Any news? ================= To: Mac Wubben , Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:09:32 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Site down again? From: mark zentkovich This may be a subject for the obcac, but here goes: We may want to include want list link in our obc directory right below our street I for one make a copy of the directory into a text file to keep onhand=E2=A6it is quicker and easier for me to use, than logging in for address list every time. If we had our website on the directory, we would not need the website (whenit is down unexpectedly) for those of use who use other sites to host our personal want lists. Website URL is a part of directory of another group I am in, and with that said, some members don=E2=99t even use that group=E2=99s site since they can get to folks lists through the offline list Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 10:07 AM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Mac Wubben Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Site down again? Couldn't get to site this morning. Any news? ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: tigers new manager? From: mark zentkovich What does the FOOT think of the new hire of Ron Gardenhire? Curious on your take on this change=E2=A6 Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= To: yahoogroups , mark zentkovich Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 17:27:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? From: Mac Wubben I am happy to see him hired. He seems like a great guy who can get slightly out-managed at critical times...just the type of guy to manage someone else in the division. (That was my impression of him with the Twins anyways). Happy to see Dusty hit the trails too. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 1:23 PM To: yahoogroups Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? What does the FOOT think of the new hire of Ron Gardenhire? Curious on your take on this change=85 Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows ================= Date: 20 Oct 2017 17:41:34 +0000 To: Subject: Set killed, great ebay seller, and some waiver wires- all in the same post! From: jehutch75@gmail.com ================= Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:12:46 -0400 To: obcmac@hotmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, mzentko@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Considering the Tigers are in complete re-build mold, a Manager like Gardenhire will be fine. In a few years, if the re-build goes well, the Tigers can get a different type of Manager at that time. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: yahoogroups ; mark zentkovich Sent: Fri, Oct 20, 2017 1:27 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? I am happy to see him hired. He seems like a great guy who can get slightly out-managed at critical times...just the type of guy to manage someone else in the division. (That was my impression of him with the Twins anyways). Happy to see Dusty hit the trails too. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 1:23 PM To: yahoogroups Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? What does the FOOT think of the new hire of Ron Gardenhire? Curious on your take on this change=E2=A6 Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= To: EEK , yahoogroups Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:24:59 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? From: mark zentkovich Sounds good=E2=A6and in the introductory press conference he said he loved all the analysts and look forward to their data, so I think that made the GM happy that he is open to the data analysis side that many of the younger managers are into Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: EEK originaleek1@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 1:57 PM To: mark zentkovich; yahoogroups Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] tigers new manager? They (Dombrowski?) had a chance to hire him some time back and passed on him. I always liked him and was disappointed. It's a 180 in managerial style which I like. Gardy is old school, no nonsense and very good with young talent..... I really like the move. Earl "EEK" Kilbourn "we keep what we give away!" On Friday, October 20, 2017 1:23 PM, "mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: What does the FOOT think of the new hire of Ron Gardenhire? Curious on your take on this change=E2=A6 Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= To: "tvalacak@comcast.net" Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 00:59:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Young A's collector From: Shawn Smart ================= Date: 21 Oct 2017 03:48:12 +0000 To: Subject: I am stunned From: mikesportsfan@aol.com ================= To: obc-wantlist@yahoogroups.com, Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 23:55:52 -0400 Subject: site From: ED SCHOTT any updates yet? ================= Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 23:52:48 -0400 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Ed Hutchinson That is very sad to hear. Condolences to his wife, and to those who knew him well. Rich and I only conversed briefly, but he exhibited the traits that make OBC great, he was very generous to me one or two times with cards, and I was very happy to have known him, even briefly Ed Hutchinson On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will > see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in > any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 00:12:27 -0400 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Yahoo Wow that really sucks. Prayers for his family. Jerry Barnes Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 20, 2017, at 23:48, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= To: , Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 21:17:38 -0700 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: "Grant Rainsley" I was lucky to meet Rich once, when we went to Vegas and hooked up with he and Lynn at our Hotel=E2=A6.it was a brief meeting=E2=A6=E2=A6..far too brief, I felt like I had known them both all my life. Rich will be remembered in the Rainsley household, just a really GOOD guy. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: October 20, 2017 8:48 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com ================= Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 22:08:20 -0700 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: John Stamper I am so sad. We were just talking about visiting him today. Raleigh and I met up with Rich and Lynn for the past 8 plus years when we were out near Vegas. Karyn and I were at his house a couple of years ago. We always ate at the restaurant that Debbie worked. Lynn brought some of his family out to meet us. Rich was always happy to have me search his boxes of dupes and share his cards with me. Insisting I took something new home to start a set. Itwas a pleasure to have known him and call him my friend. I feel that a part of me is gone. I'm in tears... John Stamper > On Oct 20, 2017, at 8:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:48:41 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, , Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Glenn Codere Wow. This is such terrible news to wake up to. I met Rich while visiting Las Vegas 5 or 6 years ago. Since then, we've exchanged several email conversations and cards. Rich had been particularly generous over the past year in boosting my more recent Topps sets. We always had some great chats, and I'm glad to have been a friend of his. GlennGlasgow, Scotland On Saturday, October 21, 2017, 4:48:17 AM GMT+1, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:50:52 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Rich Niessen From: Glenn Codere Wow. This is such terrible news to wake up to. I met Rich while visiting Las Vegas 5 or 6 years ago. Since then, we've exchanged several email conversations and cards. Rich had been particularly generous over the past year in boosting my more recent Topps sets. We always had some great chats, and I'm glad to have been a friend of his. GlennGlasgow, Scotland ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 04:50:52 -0400 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: JDahms ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 07:35:49 -0700 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Rick This is very sad news to me also I've meet up with Rich and Lynn three times over the years the last time a few months ago. Both genuinely nice guys always glad to see you and spend time with you. He will be truly missed. Rick Sent from my iPad > On Oct 20, 2017, at 8:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:50:31 -0400 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Steve Although I never met Rich, he was one of the first guys to welcome me into OBC when I joined back in March of 2016. His generosity overwhelmed me whenhe sent a box loaded with various Yankees. He truly demonstrated what the spirit of OBC is all about. God bless him and his family. Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad > On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 09:44:24 -0700 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: 1971/72 O-PEE-CHEE NHL HOCKEY POSTER LOT LOW GRADE, FREE MAILING From: Rick Theses are definitely OBC grade but I think these are tough to get so thought someone might be interested in them. Rick View item: 1971/72 O-PEE-CHEE NHL HOCKEY POSTER LOT LOW GRADE, FREE MAILING End Time: Oct 27, 2017, 9:35:13 AM PDT Sent from my iPad ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:31:14 +0000 To: EEK , Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Joel Freedman RIP, Rich We will miss you. On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:26 PM EEK originaleek1@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > It is always very sad to hear of an OBC member's passing. It is akin to > losing an extended family member. Thoughts, prayers and condolences go out > to his family. I don't think I ever met Rich but we exchanged envelopes > from time to time and he was always very generous whether it be with ROAks > or return fire. I hope there is something significant that we can do for > his family. I will be happy to contribute. > Earll "EEK" Kilbourn > "we keep what we give away!" > On Friday, October 20, 2017 11:48 PM, "mikesportsfan@aol.com > [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will > see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in > any way. > A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. > Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:15:44 -0500 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: T J Content-Disposition: inline Wow. This really sad to read about this. Although I never met Rich, he and I exchanged quite a few emails. Many about cards, but many about health issues. I always appreciated that he would shoot me an email just to see how Iwas doing, and how my family was doing. On the card front, he has sent me a boatload of Cards for my uv championship project. Always very generous. I will miss you Rich. RIP TJ Valacak -----Original Message----- From: OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: 2017-10-20 10:50:15 PM Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 13:25:53 -0400 To: obc Ramblings Subject: re: I am stunned From: LAWRENCE TIPTON When I would visit Las Vegas, I would always try to meet up with Lynn and Rich. As I remember Rich retired in Las Vegas, and enjoyed the slot machinesand the great casino food. I never saw his collection, but heard it was very well organized. Alphabetized and all in binders. We exchanged cards every now and again, and Rich always had encouraging words for me. He will be missed! ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 13:37:00 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Rich Niessen From: KEVINM38@aol.com I do not know what to say Rich and I passed many cards between us , I never meet him but he was a good friend via the PC. He just seemed to be a very kind and a stand up person just from the emails we passed between us He will be missed God Bless Richard and my heart and prayers go out to his family ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:45:28 -0400 Subject: ???????????? From: ED SCHOTT anyone else having trouble getting to the directory,mailing addresses etc ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 19:28:05 +0000 Subject: RIP Rich From: richard dingman I met Rich and Lynn a few years ago when I used to frequent Vegas for work. Had a great visit with them both at a no-longer-extant Omelet House on W Charleston for a wonderful meeting/visit and breakfast. Had hoped to do more but have not been back to the city since. A loss to OBC certainly and also the wider world in troubled times. He will be missed by many I am sure. Richard D From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Steve rangersteve7@optonline.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 10:50 AM To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Cc: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned Although I never met Rich, he was one of the first guys to welcome me into OBC when I joined back in March of 2016. His generosity overwhelmed me whenhe sent a box loaded with various Yankees. He truly demonstrated what the spirit of OBC is all about. God bless him and his family. Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= To: Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:53:28 -0500 Subject: Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? From: "George Vrechek" Is there something I have to do to access the OBC site again? I tried restarting, deleting cookies, deleting history and waiting a while but still can't access the directory page or wantlists. George Vrechek ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 17:22:53 -0400 To: vrechek@ameritech.net, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? From: mikesportsfan@aol.com We are still experiencing issues with the OBC site. I can now review mylists, but cannot update them. I cannot access the OBC site. Other listscan be accessed by Googling the persons name and wantlist. This is now working for those who have list hosted on the OBC site. This is a step up from Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 3:53 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? Is there something I have to do to access the OBC site again? I tried restarting, deleting cookies, deleting history and waiting a while but still can=E2=99t access the directory page or wantlists. George Vrechek ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 17:09:06 -0400 To: George Vrechek Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? From: Anthony I can access my pages but not update......we are half way back to normal. Thanks for the efforts Sent from my iPad > On Oct 21, 2017, at 3:53 PM, 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Is there something I have to do to access the OBC site again? I tried restarting, deleting cookies, deleting history and waiting a while but still can=E2=99t access the directory page or wantlists. > George Vrechek ================= To: , Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:58:59 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? From: "George Vrechek" Thanks, guys, for the updates. I=E2=99ll stay tuned=E2=A6and patient.I thought maybe I needed to do something. I am very good at not doing anything fancy on the computer. George Vrechek From: mikesportsfan@aol.com [mailto:mikesportsfan@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 4:23 PM To: vrechek@ameritech.net; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? We are still experiencing issues with the OBC site. I can now review mylists, but cannot update them. I cannot access the OBC site. Other listscan be accessed by Googling the persons name and wantlist. This is now working for those who have list hosted on the OBC site. This is a step up from Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 3:53 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Tech support - Getting back on the OBC site? Is there something I have to do to access the OBC site again? I tried restarting, deleting cookies, deleting history and waiting a while but still can=E2=99t access the directory page or wantlists. George Vrechek ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 18:19:34 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: 6PM OBC website status From: Wayne Delia I spoke with a supervisor at Network Solutions and asked them what was happening with our database. It's really getting frustrating. The official status is "They're working on it," but they've allegedly been working on it for the past 35 hours. All we can do now is wait for them to resynch the database, and as soon as we can connect to it, I'll export and save all the data and we'll move to another hosting platform. I'm leaning toward HostGator, which has a very low introductory rate (they're boasting $2.78 per month for the first year),24/7/365 technical support, MySQL databases, and unlimited disk space, bandwidth, and email addresses. I asked NS to keep me in the loop about what was happening, but I haven't gotten a single email or status at all. Also, the supervisor told me she'd call me within the hour, and that was two hours ago. I'll let you all know if anything changes, but don't hold your breath. ================= To: "'Wayne Delia'" , Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 15:41:43 -0700 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] 6PM OBC website status From: "Grant Rainsley" Many thanks for all you do for this great group Wayne! From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: October 21, 2017 3:20 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] 6PM OBC website status I spoke with a supervisor at Network Solutions and asked them what was happening with our database. It's really getting frustrating. The official status is "They're working on it," but they've allegedly been working on it forthe past 35 hours. All we can do now is wait for them to resynch the database, and as soon as we can connect to it, I'll export and save all the dataand we'll move to another hosting platform. I'm leaning toward HostGator, which has a very low introductory rate (they're boasting $2.78 per month for the first year),24/7/365 technical support, MySQL databases, and unlimited disk space, bandwidth, and email addresses. I asked NS to keep me in the loop about what was happening, but I haven't gotten a single email or status at all. Also, the supervisor told me she'd call me within the hour, and that was two hours ago. I'll let you all know if anything changes, but don'thold your breath. This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com ================= To: "'OBC Ramblings'" Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 18:39:46 -0400 Subject: 58 is now a Want List From: "Bob Donaldson" Thanks to some recent purchases, my 58 Topps set is now a want list! I also have tons of dups, so send me your wants 1958 Topps 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 13 18 25 26 29 30 33 34 37 38 39 42 45 46 47 49 50 62 63 64 69-76 79 81 82 83 86 87 88 93 94 96 99 101 103 104 105 110 111 112 114 118 119 122 123 126 128 133 135 137 139 145 149 150 151 152 153 157 162 166 167 169 176 179 182 184 186 187 188 190 202 205 211 214 216 222 223 228 230 234 235 237 239 245 249 251 255 259 260 263 264 269 270 271 272 275 276 277 281 283 285 286 287 288 294 306 307 308 309 310 311 319 320 321 325 326 327 328 329 330 332 335 339 343 347 349 355 356 362 370 374 418 437 443 446 450 452 460 462 464 468 470 472 474 476 477 480 481 482 484 486 494 495 ================= To: Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 21:43:24 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: "Sal Domino" It=E2=99s never a good day in OBC land when we have to add someone to our =E2=9Cother=E2=9D list. Rich carried the spirit of OBC for a long time. Now he is trading cards with some of our other departed friends. RIP Rich, you will be missed. BTW, I am adding the link to my want list in my signature. Might be a good idea for everyone to do that who has a list that isn=E2=99t on our host site. Wayne, I feel your pain=E2=A6 Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 11:48 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 19:14:18 -0700 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: "Erik & Leticia Greenwood" My condolences to Debbie and their family. I had the privilege of meeting Rich several years ago. He was a generous man, in the spirit of OBC. Erik Greenwood On Oct 20, 2017 8:48 PM, "mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings]" < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any way. A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 10:10:10 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: Wayne Delia I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another web hosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a non-executive "executive decision" to start that process. Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions about an hour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their servers, and this query usually runs in much less than one second). Also, we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without any access to the web site or the database. There would be no way to test out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install. This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from the web site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set to migrate to another web hosting service provider. *Here's what I want everybody to do: * 1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on oldbaseball.com, you can update it as usual. 2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com, please don't attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another service provider. 3) If and when the website and database become available again, please don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, email, phone, etc. 4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows of a cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or Joe Isaac know of your recommendations. 5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting Sorry about the disruption... ================= To: "'Wayne Delia'" , Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 07:02:40 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: "Bob Donaldson" Thanks for all your hard work. Sounds like you are taking prudent measures. Some random thoughts 1. What if we do have a db query problem and that follows us to the new provider? I think the ability to troubleshoot this type a problem might be akey criteria in selecting a provider as is their customer service in detail. I think that concurrent with searching for a new provider, we should continue to escalate with our existing provider (=E2=9Cthe devil you know=E2=9D). However, with our ~$200 a year website, they are probably happy to see us go and I don=E2=99t expect too much co-operation. 2. I would not rush to picking a new service provider. Put the site in ROmode and take time to research options. Especially their support capabilities. Tell them the problem we have been having and see that support wouldbe better with them if we need to troubleshoot a similar problem. Is it worth tripling (or more?) our costs to get a provider that provides excellent 3. Is the DB necessary? My big concern is who by yourself can maintain it?Could all out user info collecting preferences etc. be kept in a google spreadsheet? 4. Is it worth looking at something like Net54 has? My guess is that wouldbe quite a bit more expensive, but you never know. Just some thoughts. Keep up the good work! From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 10:10 AM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another web hosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a non-executive "executive decision" to start that process. Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions about anhour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their servers, and thisquery usually runs in much less than one second). Also, we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without any access to theweb site or the database. There would be no way to test out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install. This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from theweb site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set tomigrate to another web hosting service provider. Here's what I want everybody to do: 1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on oldbaseball.com , you can update it as usual. 2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com , please don't attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another service provider. 3) If and when the website and database become available again, please don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, email, phone, etc. 4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows of a cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or Joe Isaac know of your recommendations. 5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting service. Sorry about the disruption... Virus-free. ================= To: Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 11:02:03 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: "Matt Yudt" I too of course was saddened and stunned to hear about the loss of an OBC=E2=99er. Like others, I never met him but had several email and card exchanges with him over the past 6 years since I joined the family. He was very generous and really helpful, especially in the UV collecting world =E2=93 made it seem less overwhelming and was generally a nice and supportive guy. He will be missed Matt Yudt From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve rangersteve7@optonline.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2017 10:51 AM To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Cc: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned Although I never met Rich, he was one of the first guys to welcome me into OBC when I joined back in March of 2016. His generosity overwhelmed me whenhe sent a box loaded with various Yankees. He truly demonstrated what the spirit of OBC is all about. God bless him and his family. Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:48 PM, mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= To: Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 12:24:40 -0400 Subject: Good Ebay seller From: "Sal Domino" Been in touch with a guy from ebay, where I purchased the last 2 52T high numbers I need for the Dodger collection (besides 2 variations- Black Snider and Jackie with stitching left) . He has a load of high numbers for sale that were upgraded for his 52T set. Good prices and condition. Check him out, if you see something you like, email him directly and he could cut you a deal. Nice dude and he is working on Play balls. Going to try to get a want list from him. His name is Dan and his email is dwiberg123@gmail.com. Tell him you know me and are from OBC. https://www.ebay.com/sch/gfdwarf/m.html?item=292286259940 Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 18:05:46 +0000 Subject: Is the Hocktober spreadsheet messed up? From: Taylor Schock ================= Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:53:00 -0400 To: Taylor Schock Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Is the Hocktober spreadsheet messed up? From: Joel Freedman my opinion is that the vintage hoctober list is improperly sorted! It needs to be redone. On Oct 22, 2017, at 2:05 PM, Taylor Schock taylor_schock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Prior to going on vacation, I pulled some cards for people but didn't have a chance to send them out. In going to the spreadsheet now to confirm that they are still needed, I don't see any listings for 68/69 through 72/73 except for Mark Talbot, who seems to be collecting quite a few 'second' (andthird, forth) sets. =8A Is the list messed up or am I missing something? > Regards, > Taylor ================= To: Joel Freedman Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 20:51:31 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Is the Hocktober spreadsheet messed up? From: Taylor Schock ================= Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 16:56:19 -0400 To: Taylor Schock Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Is the Hocktober spreadsheet messed up? From: Joel Freedman I spread shows this=E2=A6.. Joel Freedman 1961-62 York Peanut Butter =E2=93 yellow backs 10b New York Islanders VAR it should be like this=E2=A6.. Joel Freedman 191978-79 Topps Stickers 10b New York Islanders VAR to me, somehow it was sorted improperly. i guess it could be copy and pasted On Oct 22, 2017, at 4:51 PM, Taylor Schock wrote: > It's not just the sorting, as it doesn't explain Mark's collecting 6, 71/72 sets, unless he is while no one else is collecting any, including myself. =9E And I know more of mine are missing in the listing. > Regards, > Taylor > From: Joel Freedman > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 2:53 PM > To: Taylor Schock > Cc: OBC Ramblings > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Is the Hocktober spreadsheet messed up? > my opinion is that the vintage hoctober list is improperly sorted! > It needs to be redone. > Joel > On Oct 22, 2017, at 2:05 PM, Taylor Schock taylor_schock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Prior to going on vacation, I pulled some cards for people but didn't have a chance to send them out. In going to the spreadsheet now to confirm that they are still needed, I don't see any listings for 68/69 through 72/73 except for Mark Talbot, who seems to be collecting quite a few 'second' (and third, forth) sets. =8A Is the list messed up or am I missing something? >> Regards, >> Taylor ================= To: Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 20:29:54 -0400 Subject: Rich Niessen story From: "Greg Henthorn" I was saddened to learn of Rich Niessen's passing. At one point, I had posted that I wanted to get my young son into baseball card collecting, and that my son had taken a liking to newer cards. Rich sent me a big box full of UV cards. But each one was different (and several were stars, special cards, hall of famers, etc.). And in between each card, Rich had taken the time to include a strip of paper with handwriting referencing what year, set, etc. the card came from, so that when my son found a set he liked, he would know which one it was. I have no idea how much time that took Rich to do that, but it was very much appreciated. We received the box of cards right before our beach trip a couple years ago, and so we had the cards to look through while I was spending quality time with my son. I will never forget that, nor Rich's kindness. For him, it seemed, Random Acts of Kindness were not so random. -Greg Henthorn ================= Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:14:53 -0400 To: Greg Henthorn Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Rich Niessen story From: Andy Huntoon Rich was one of my sponsors when I first joined OBC. He was a great guy and was always happy to answer any of my questions whenever I would reach out to him. The amount of cards he had was mind boggling to me. I am very saddened to hear of his passing. If there is anything I can do please let me know. OBC Forever. Andy Huntoon On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 8:29 PM, 'Greg Henthorn' ghenthorn34@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I was saddened to learn of Rich Niessen=E2=99s passing. At one point, I > posted that I wanted to get my young son into baseball card collecting, and > that my son had taken a liking to newer cards. Rich sent me a big box full > of UV cards. But each one was different (and several were stars, special > cards, hall of famers, etc.). And in between each card, Rich had taken the > time to include a strip of paper with handwriting referencing what year, > set, etc. the card came from, so that when my son found a set he liked, he > would know which one it was. I have no idea how much time that took Rich to > do that, but it was very much appreciated. We received the box of cards > right before our beach trip a couple years ago, and so we had the cards to > look through while I was spending quality time with my son. I will never > forget that, nor Rich=E2=99s kindness. > For him, it seemed, Random Acts of Kindness were not so random. > -Greg Henthorn ================= Date: 23 Oct 2017 05:19:20 +0000 To: Subject: Rich From: mikerw7@gmail.com ================= Date: 23 Oct 2017 14:35:53 +0000 To: Subject: Rich From: jschris@triwest.net ================= Date: 23 Oct 2017 14:48:22 +0000 To: Subject: 1974 Waivers From: jschris@triwest.net ================= Date: 23 Oct 2017 15:53:23 +0000 To: Subject: 74 Waivers--Claimed From: jschris@triwest.net ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 16:39:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned From: Shawn Smart This news hit me pretty hard as well. As I was packing up A's cards for Loren on Friday night, I found a few hits for Rich. I was going to mail these out Saturday morning, so now the envelope sits on my desk as a sad reminder... Rich was an OBC Mentor to me. He helped me get my wantlist set up for my application to OBC. Rich sent me 20 packages since I joined the group andmany of those were large boxes. We would occasionally chat on the soon to be defunct AOL Instant Messenger.I felt like we had a bond since he was a NY guy. Rich literally had almost every set you could think of on his list. His UVcollection was pretty insane. He was always prodding me to add more sets to my wantlist so he could hit them. His generous spirit will be missed by myself and the group. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 11:48 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] I am stunned I just found out Rich Niessen passed away earlier today. Lynn Miller will see Rich's wife Debbie tomorrow. He will let us know if OBC can assist in any A very nice guy who really enjoyed OBC. Mike Rich ================= To: OBC Ramblings Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 18:20:39 +0000 Subject: Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Aaron Shirley I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. Let me know if it looks correct to you. ================= To: OBC Ramblings Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 18:23:23 +0000 Subject: Re: Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Aaron Shirley I've locked it for now, so you can view it but not edit it. That's just temporary until I get some input that it's corrected. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AEVu9eRjF_zWRFTdhfrbeIIxP-YIhZ114hRzTmR4Y90/edit?uspsharing From: Aaron Shirley Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 1:20 PM To: OBC Ramblings Cc: Taylor Schock; Joel Freedman Subject: Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. Let me know if it looks correct to you. ================= To: Dan Angland , "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 19:10:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Aaron Shirley ================= To: Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 15:47:11 -0500 Subject: T118 Explorers and T30 Arctic Scenes From: "George Vrechek" Do any of you non-sports collectors have experience collecting these 1910 tobacco insert sets? I'm researching how difficult and expensive they are to George Vrechek ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 16:21:44 -0400 To: Aaron Shirley Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Joel Freedman cant see it until tonight. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Anyone else look at it? Does it seem correct? > Aaron > Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 23, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Dan Angland wrote: > looks good > Dan Angland > ------------------------------ > *From:* "Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> > *To:* OBC Ramblings > *Cc:* Taylor Schock ; Joel Freedman < > jefreedman1@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, October 23, 2017 2:20 PM > *Subject:* [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please > I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: > *Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT.* > Let me know if it looks correct to you. > Aaron ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 17:20:10 -0400 To: obc Ramblings , Subject: re: T118 Explorers and T30 Arctic Scenes From: LAWRENCE TIPTON I have both sets completed. T118 Explorers I put together card by card and it was pretty easy to put the set together I really don=E2=99t remember how much I paid per card but it wasn=E2=99t much, probably $4-$5 a card. I picked up the T30 set (25 cards) at a recent auction https://www.sterlingsportsauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid42618 Notice the full set of 25 cards cost $53.55 which includes buyers premium. $2.15 a card for 100+ year old cards? ALL DAY! ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 17:22:42 -0400 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 58 is now a Want List From: Steve Hi Bob, Numbers 111 & 474 coming your way. Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad > On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:39 PM, 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Thanks to some recent purchases, my 58 Topps set is now a want list! I also have tons of dups, so send me your wants > 1958 Topps 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 13 18 25 26 29 30 33 34 37 38 39 42 45 46 47 49 50 62 63 64 69-76 79 81 82 83 86 87 88 93 94 96 99 101 103 104 105 110 111 112 114 118 119 122 123 126 128 133 135 137 139 145 149 150 151 152 153 157162 166 167 169 176 179 182 184 186 187 188 190 202 205 211 214 216 222 223 228 230 234 235 237 239 245 249 251 255 259 260 263 264 269 270 271 272 275 276 277 281 283 285 286 287 288 294 306 307 308 309 310 311 319 320 321 325 326 327 328 329 330 332 335 339 343 347 349 355 356 362 370 374 418 437443 446 450 452 460 462 464 468 470 472 474 476 477 480 481 482 484 486 494 > Thanks > Bob ================= To: Bob Donaldson Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:28:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 58 is now a Want List From: richard dingman I will be sending you #71, Dodgers Team card. Richard D From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Steve rangersteve7@optonline.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 5:22 PM To: Bob Donaldson Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 58 is now a Want List Hi Bob, Numbers 111 & 474 coming your way. Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:39 PM, 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Thanks to some recent purchases, my 58 Topps set is now a want list! I also have tons of dups, so send me your wants 1958 Topps 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 13 18 25 26 29 30 33 34 37 38 39 42 45 46 47 49 5062 63 64 69-76 79 81 82 83 86 87 88 93 94 96 99 101 103 104 105 110 111 112 114 118 119 122 123 126 128 133 135 137 139 145 149 150 151 152 153 157 162 166 167 169 176 179 182 184 186 187 188 190 202 205 211 214 216 222 223 228 230 234 235 237 239 245 249 251 255 259 260 263 264 269 270 271 272 275276 277 281 283 285 286 287 288 294 306 307 308 309 310 311 319 320 321 325 326 327 328 329 330 332 335 339 343 347 349 355 356 362 370 374 418 437 443 446 450 452 460 462 464 468 470 472 474 476 477 480 481 482 484 486 494 495 ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 18:11:31 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: Card page question From: JDahms ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 18:58:17 -0400 To: Joel Freedman Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Mark Talbot I'm still at work but I'll look at it when I get home. I can tell you thatI don't collect any second third fourth or 185th sets. I do collect multiples of norm cash and Yaz cards you're my hero binders but no second sets ofanything. - Mark Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 23, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Joel Freedman jefreedman1@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > cant see it until tonight. > Joel >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Anyone else look at it? Does it seem correct? >> Aaron >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Oct 23, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Dan Angland wrote: >>> looks good >>> Dan Angland >>> From: "Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" >>> To: OBC Ramblings >>> Cc: Taylor Schock ; Joel Freedman >>> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:20 PM >>> Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please >>> I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: >>> Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. >>> Let me know if it looks correct to you. >>> Aaron ================= To: Mark Talbot , Joel Freedman Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 23:41:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Aaron Shirley Joel and Mark (and others), it sounds like everyone's saying the spreadsheets have been set aright again. Once I hear from you two tonight - just to be sure - I will unlock it for editing again. Thanks everyone for your patience. Your friendly neighborhood spreadsheet fixer / Hocktober curator, PS: Non-sport November. It's a thing. From: Mark Talbot Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 5:58 PM To: Joel Freedman Cc: Aaron Shirley; Dan Angland; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please I'm still at work but I'll look at it when I get home. I can tell you thatI don't collect any second third fourth or 185th sets. I do collect multiples of norm cash and Yaz cards you're my hero binders but no second sets ofanything. - Mark Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Joel Freedman jefreedman1@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > cant see it until tonight. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Anyone else look at it? Does it seem correct? Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Dan Angland > looks good Dan Angland From: "Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" To: OBC Ramblings > Cc: Taylor Schock >; Joel Freedman > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:20 PM Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. Let me know if it looks correct to you. ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:11:01 -0400 To: Aaron Shirley Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: Joel Freedman Aaron, you fixed it. On Oct 23, 2017, at 7:41 PM, Aaron Shirley wrote: > Joel and Mark (and others), it sounds like everyone's saying the spreadsheets have been set aright again. Once I hear from you two tonight - just tobe sure - I will unlock it for editing again. Thanks everyone for your patience. > Your friendly neighborhood spreadsheet fixer / Hocktober curator, > Aaron > PS: Non-sport November. It's a thing. > From: Mark Talbot > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 5:58 PM > To: Joel Freedman > Cc: Aaron Shirley; Dan Angland; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please > I'm still at work but I'll look at it when I get home. I can tell you that I don't collect any second third fourth or 185th sets. I do collect multiples of norm cash and Yaz cards you're my hero binders but no second sets of > - Mark > Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 23, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Joel Freedman jefreedman1@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> cant see it until tonight. >> Joel >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Anyone else look at it? Does it seem correct? >> Aaron >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Oct 23, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Dan Angland wrote: >>> looks good >>> Dan Angland >>> From: "Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" >>> To: OBC Ramblings >>> Cc: Taylor Schock ; Joel Freedman >>> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:20 PM >>> Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please >>> I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: >>> Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. >>> Let me know if it looks correct to you. >>> Aaron ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:18:15 -0400 To: uthminsta@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please From: mikesportsfan@aol.com PS: Non-sport November. It's a thing. I remember back in the 1970s being laughed at during shows for asking for other than BB cards. We can actually drive SOUTH from Detroit to get to Canada (Windsor), but one time I asked if someone had Canadian Football cards and they started yelling for guys in straight jackets to take me away. That said, I still think you Non-sport guys are heathens! With well over 150,000 vintage sports cards available to chase, who needs more??? Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: Mark Talbot ; Joel Freedman Cc: obc-ramblings Sent: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 7:41 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please Joel and Mark (and others), it sounds like everyone's saying the spreadsheets have been set aright again. Once I hear from you two tonight - just to be sure - I will unlock it for editing again. Thanks everyone for your patience. Your friendly neighborhood spreadsheet fixer / Hocktober curator, PS: Non-sport November. It's a thing. From: Mark Talbot Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 5:58 PM To: Joel Freedman Cc: Aaron Shirley; Dan Angland; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please I'm still at work but I'll look at it when I get home. I can tell you thatI don't collect any second third fourth or 185th sets. I do collect multiples of norm cash and Yaz cards you're my hero binders but no second sets ofanything. - Mark Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Joel Freedman jefreedman1@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: cant see it until tonight. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: Anyone else look at it? Does it seem correct? Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Dan Angland wrote: looks good Dan Angland From: "Aaron Shirley uthminsta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" To: OBC Ramblings Cc: Taylor Schock ; Joel Freedman Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:20 PM Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Hocktober spreadsheet FIX - input please I believe I can fix this. Need a favor though: Please take a look BUT DO NOT EDIT IT. Let me know if it looks correct to you. ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:21:58 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: Andy Cook Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level? Sent from my iPad ================= Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:48:58 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: Ken M I've collected this set. I started collecting cards in 1977, so I thought this would be a good addition to the collection. It is one of the very few, if not the only set I ever gave up on. I started and finished somewhere in the late 1990's Difficulty level: extremely high - and this coming from someone who completed 1952 Topps and 1948-49 Leaf baseball with high numbers and SP's. I even went so far as buying an unopened box - and got multiples of many of the cards I already had. The ones I needed were all impossibly difficult short prints - and I needed A LOT of them. There was also exactly ONE dealer who even had any of these things set up at shows. I realized that unless I found a connection in Mexico, I wasn't going to come close to completing the set unless I won the lottery... two or three times. I boxed up the whole collection and sold it on eBay - for a loss, just to get rid of them. But hey, you don't have to listen to me :-D Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Andy Cook typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 9:22 PMTo: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com;Cc: Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:05:48 -0400 To: cardclctor@aol.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I've been able to pick up a grand total of 2 of them in 40 years. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: obc-ramblings Sent: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 9:49 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB I've collected this set. I started collecting cards in 1977, so I thought this would be a good addition to the collection. It is one of the very few, if not the only set I ever gave up on. I started and finished somewhere in the late 1990's Difficulty level: extremely high - and this coming from someone who completed 1952 Topps and 1948-49 Leaf baseball with high numbers and SP's. I even went so far as buying an unopened box - and got multiples of many of the cards I already had. The ones I needed were all impossibly difficult short prints - and I needed A LOT of them. There was also exactly ONE dealer who even had any of these things set up at shows. I realized thatunless I found a connection in Mexico, I wasn't going to come close to completing the set unless I won the lottery... two or three times. I boxed up the whole collection and sold it on eBay - for a loss, just to get rid of them. But hey, you don't have to listen to me :-D Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Andy Coo k typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 9:22 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level?AndySent from my iPad------------------------------------Posted by: Andy Cook ------------------------------------The OBC-AC would like to remind members to sign their names at the end of each posted message.Although discussion of topics ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:19:31 -0400 To: Andy Cook Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: "Samuel E. Taylor" Wow, I thought Mike Rich would have had more than that. Maybe I have the most of these, but they are CRAZY expensive and very hard to find. I have bought all of them that I could find when a dealer has them, and that has been rare, including at the Nationals and I only have a little over a hundred (104 at last count). You can find them on eBay for stupid prices, and bulk lots show up at times, but I've usualy been outbid. I would really like to at least finish the Detroit Lions team set, but even that seems daunting. I currently have ONE dupe, number 190 Toni Linhart. The wrappers are pretty cool, though, and reasonably priced, or at least easier to find. I have all five variations. Sam Taylor On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Andy Cook typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level? > Andy > Sent from my iPad Sam Taylor ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:40:17 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: hoot_owl1@verizon.net I have a type card that Ed Schott gave me years ago. Never even seen any others. peter mead -----Original Message----- From: mikesportsfan@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: cardclctor ; obc-ramblings Sent: Tue, Oct 24, 2017 8:05 am Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB I've been able to pick up a grand total of 2 of them in 40 years. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: obc-ramblings Sent: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 9:49 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB I've collected this set. I started collecting cards in 1977, so I thought this would be a good addition to the collection. It is one of the very few, if not the only set I ever gave up on. I started and finished somewhere in the late 1990's Difficulty level: extremely high - and this coming from someone who completed 1952 Topps and 1948-49 Leaf baseball with high numbers and SP's. I even went so far as buying an unopened box - and got multiples of many of the cards I already had. The ones I needed were all impossibly difficult short prints - and I needed A LOT of them. There was also exactly ONE dealer who even had any of these things set up at shows. I realized thatunless I found a connection in Mexico, I wasn't going to come close to completing the set unless I won the lottery... two or three times. I boxed up the whole collection and sold it on eBay - for a loss, just to get rid of them. But hey, you don't have to listen to me :-D Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Andy Coo k typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Mon, Oct 23, 2017 9:22 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level?AndySent from my iPad------------------------------------Posted by: Andy Cook ------------------------------------The OBC-AC would like to remind members to sign their names at the end of each posted message.Although discussion of topics ================= To: Andy Cook , "Samuel E. Taylor" Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 13:41:22 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: Mac Wubben That's kind of the benchmark for being a front runner on a set...wow, I have more than Mike...I'm doing pretty good. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of 'Samuel E. Taylor' drsam9795@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:19 AM To: Andy Cook Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB Wow, I thought Mike Rich would have had more than that. Maybe I have the most of these, but they are CRAZY expensive and very hard to find. I have bought all of them that I could find when a dealer has them, and that has beenrare, including at the Nationals and I only have a little over a hundred (104 at last count). You can find them on eBay for stupid prices, and bulk lots show up at times, but I've usualy been outbid. I would really like to at least finish the Detroit Lions team set, but even that seems daunting. I currently have ONE dupe, number 190 Toni Linhart. The wrappers are pretty cool, though, and reasonably priced, or at least easier to find. I have all five Sam Taylor On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Andy Cook typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Anyone ever collect this set? What=92s the difficulty level? Sent from my iPad Sam Taylor ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:01:52 -0400 To: richard dingman Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 58 is now a Want List From: "Samuel E. Taylor" These three coming right behind them... 18, 37, 39. Sam Taylor On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:28 PM, richard dingman brightair@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Bob, > I will be sending you #71, Dodgers Team card. > Best, > Richard D > ------------------------------ > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on > behalf of Steve rangersteve7@optonline.net [OBC-Ramblings] < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Monday, October 23, 2017 5:22 PM > *To:* Bob Donaldson > *Cc:* OBC Ramblings > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 58 is now a Want List > Hi Bob, > Numbers 111 & 474 coming your way. > Steve Sankner > Sent from my iPad > On Oct 21, 2017, at 6:39 PM, 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com > [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Thanks to some recent purchases, my 58 Topps set is now a want list! I > also have tons of dups, so send me your wants > 1958 Topps 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 13 18 25 26 29 30 33 34 37 38 39 42 45 46 47 49 > 50 62 63 64 69-76 79 81 82 83 86 87 88 93 94 96 99 101 103 104 105 110 111 > 112 114 118 119 122 123 126 128 133 135 137 139 145 149 150 151 152 153 157 > 162 166 167 169 176 179 182 184 186 187 188 190 202 205 211 214 216 222 223 > 228 230 234 235 237 239 245 249 251 255 259 260 263 264 269 270 271 272 275 > 276 277 281 283 285 286 287 288 294 306 307 308 309 310 311 319 320 321 325 > 326 327 328 329 330 332 335 339 343 347 349 355 356 362 370 374 418 437 443 > 446 450 452 460 462 464 468 470 472 474 476 477 480 481 482 484 486 494 495 > Thanks > Bob Sam Taylor ================= To: Mac Wubben , Andy Cook , Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:35:24 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: mark zentkovich I have bought several from my team on comc for a couple of bucks each for commons Have never seen any at the few shows there are down here. Mark Z Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:42 AM To: Andy Cook; Samuel E. Taylor Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB That's kind of the benchmark for being a frontrunner on a set...wow, I have more than Mike...I'm doing pretty good. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of 'Samuel E. Taylor' drsam9795@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:19 AM To: Andy Cook Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB Wow, I thought Mike Rich would have had more than that. Maybe I have the most of these, but they are CRAZY expensive and very hard to find. I have bought all of them that I could find when a dealer has them, and that has beenrare, including at the Nationals and I only have a little over a hundred (104 at last count). You can find them on eBay for stupid prices, and bulk lots show up at times, but I've usualy been outbid. I would really like to at least finish the Detroit Lions team set, but even that seems daunting. I currently have ONE dupe, number 190 Toni Linhart. The wrappers are pretty cool, though, and reasonably priced, or at least easier to find. I have all five Sam Taylor On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Andy Cook typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level? Sent from my iPad Sam Taylor ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 07:46:29 -0700 To: mark zentkovich Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB From: Geno Wagner I=E2=99ve got a Cancun trip this weekend, so maybe I better poke around a Take Care, Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 24, 2017, at 7:35 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I have bought several from my team on comc for a couple of bucks each forcommons > Have never seen any at the few shows there are down here. > Mark Z > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:42 AM > To: Andy Cook; Samuel E. Taylor > Cc: OBC Ramblings > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB > That's kind of the benchmark for being a front runner on a set...wow, I have more than Mike....I'm doing pretty good. > <9ABBBA6863A34286872DA78AED723312.png> > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of 'Samuel E. Taylor' drsam9795@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:19 AM > To: Andy Cook > Cc: OBC Ramblings > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1977 Topps Mexican FB > Wow, I thought Mike Rich would have had more than that. Maybe I have the most of these, but they are CRAZY expensive and very hard to find. I have bought all of them that I could find when a dealer has them, and that has been rare, including at the Nationals and I only have a little over a hundred(104 at last count). You can find them on eBay for stupid prices, and bulklots show up at times, but I've usualy been outbid. I would really like toat least finish the Detroit Lions team set, but even that seems daunting. I currently have ONE dupe, number 190 Toni Linhart. The wrappers are prettycool, though, and reasonably priced, or at least easier to find. I have all five variations. > Sam Taylor > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Andy Cook typecard@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Anyone ever collect this set? What=E2=99s the difficulty level? > Andy > Sent from my iPad > -- > Sam Taylor > <9ABBBA6863A34286872DA78AED723312.png> > <68D10FE526254DD3AA299879B835F7EA.png> ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 12:44:19 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Card page question From: larrygers@aol.com Years ago some one from OBC suggested business card sheets for the 51 & 52 Bowman cards. They can be purchased at any office supply store. They fit in a three ring binder & come ten slots to a page. The cards fit perfectly & display very nicely. I also use them for 1951-52 Berk Ross, 1969 Nabisco and my 1939 & 1940 W-711 Cincinnati Reds issued cards. ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 13:14:45 -0400 To: "larrygers@aol.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question From: "Samuel E. Taylor" I use the business card sheets, too. Unfortunately, they're kind of pricey unless you get a coupon for Staples or Office Max, but the cards fit in there perfectly, its a 10 card sheet. Sam Taylor On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:44 PM, larrygers@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > John > Years ago some one from OBC suggested business card sheets for the 51 & 52 > Bowman cards. > They can be purchased at any office supply store. They fit in a three ring > binder & come ten slots to a page. > The cards fit perfectly & display very nicely. > I also use them for 1951-52 Berk Ross, 1969 Nabisco and my 1939 & 1940 > W-711 Cincinnati Reds issued cards. > Gersh Sam Taylor ================= To: "'Samuel E. Taylor'" , Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 13:18:19 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question From: "Bob Donaldson" Are they safe for the cards, meaning non PVC archival quality? From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 'Samuel E. Taylor' drsam9795@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 1:15 PM To: larrygers@aol.com Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question I use the business card sheets, too. Unfortunately, they're kind of pricey unless you get a coupon for Staples or Office Max, but the cards fit in there perfectly, its a 10 card sheet. Sam Taylor On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:44 PM, larrygers@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: Years ago some one from OBC suggested business card sheets for the 51 & 52 Bowman They can be purchased at any office supply store. They fit in a three ring binder & come ten slots to a page. The cards fit perfectly & display very nicely. I also use them for 1951-52 Berk Ross, 1969 Nabisco and my 1939 & 1940 W-711 Cincinnati Reds issued cards. Sam Taylor ================= To: "'OBC Ramblings'" Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 15:37:19 -0400 Subject: Shriner's Show From: "Bob Donaldson" The Shriner's show in Wilmington MA is next week. By far the best show in New England. Info is here http://www.gbscc.com/2017-show/ Anyone going? ================= Date: 24 Oct 2017 21:50:25 +0000 To: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question From: james_moleta@hotmail.com ================= To: "'OBC Ramblings'" Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 18:28:08 -0400 Subject: Over at Net54 From: "Bob Donaldson" A recent member, who very much got off on the wrong foot, seem to be making amends by giving away 50/60s commons to anyone who asks. http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=246615 Bob Donaldson ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 18:21:14 -0700 To: james_moleta@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question From: John Stamper I'm still able to buy them. John Stamper > On Oct 24, 2017, at 2:50 PM, james_moleta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I have Ultra-Pro Platinum 12 pocket sheets holding my 51 red/blue backs &48-50 bowman. The cards even fit nicely back to back if the sheets are cost-prohibitive (or just to save space.) I know I bought these some time ago,but have they been discontinued? ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 01:37:17 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Wants , Subject: Game 1 Waivers From: Dan Angland Here is a small waiver wire.Please include address and don't be shy. 1956 171 Gray back 1958 365 483 1959 198 1963 77 1965 412 433 1966 471 1968 3 257 1966 Phili Football 138 Thanks, Dan Angland ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 01:02:00 +0000 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show From: Matthew Glidden Plan to be there all Saturday morning! I've found plenty of great stuff in Wilmington and knock wood that the well's not dry yet. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:47 PM 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hi > The Shriner=E2=99s show in Wilmington MA is next week. By far the best show in > New England. Info is here http://www.gbscc.com/2017-show/ > Anyone going? > Bob ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:34:05 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show From: Ken M Unfortunately, I'm likely a no show for this one. I have no money and most likely even less time between work and the kids. More bad news: my plans to attend the next Philly show are also scrapped. Two of the three other (full time) guys at work are going the same week. As sort of my revenge, I put in for Christmas week instead. Ho Ho Ho! Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Matthew Glidden glidden.matthew@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Tue, Oct 24, 2017 10:06 PMTo: Bob Donaldson;Cc: OBC Ramblings;Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show Plan to be there all Saturday morning! I've found plenty of great stuff in Wilmington and knock wood that the well's not dry yet. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:47 PM 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote:   Hi The Shriner’s show in Wilmington MA is next week.  By far the best show in New England.  Info is here http://www.gbscc.com/2017-show/ Anyone going? Bob ================= To: , Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 18:47:20 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question From: "Matt Yudt" They (12-pocket) are not discontinued =E2=93 just bought a bunch of single pages a few weeks ago at a card shop (shouldvbe bought a whole box). They are perfect for what you said. I asked about the business card holders for the 51/52 B=E2=99s once myself and did get a response from a dealer regarding the long-term storage =E2=93 aka what Bob D was referring to. I just use the 9-pagers for those,based on OBC recommendations from a year or so ago. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of james_moleta@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:50 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Card page question I have Ultra-Pro Platinum 12 pocket sheets holding my 51 red/blue backs & 48-50 bowman. The cards even fit nicely back to back if the sheets are cost-prohibitive (or just to save space.) I know I bought these some time ago, but have they been discontinued? ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:21:49 -0500 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: =?utf-8?Q?=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stick=E2=9D?From: OBC Nick P Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99sa better chance the wall would listen. I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the wasthat it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say.We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=E2=99s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99twant to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Notthe making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak.Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote.It holds the Ac to a standard. That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poorrules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m Nick Pelletier ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 20:41:54 -0700 To: OBC Nick P Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Geordie Calvert Nick, thanks for speaking your heart. Thanks for loving OBC enough to speakout on a pretty uncomfortable subject. Thanks for risking relationships over a pretty uncomfortable, but worthy, subject. For the record, I=E2=99m one of the guys Nick reached out to. I share his concerns, but didn=E2=99t have the courage to speak out. Part of me thought, =E2=9Cwhat=E2=99s done is done - what is my small voice going to matter now?=E2=9D What I do agree most strongly with him on is this: there absolutely should have been more due diligence done with the membership on this. Here absolutely should have been more transparency. There absolutely should have been aformal announcement and request for feedback from the membership regardingthe member in question - an announcement for those who don=E2=99t know the member in question and a request for feedback from those who do. We=E2=99re not talking about tax evasion on some other white collar crime, after all, but something much, much worse. I think the AC owes us some more feedback on this. I don=E2=99t think this will go away quietly, and it really shouldn=E2=99t have gotten to thepoint that a good man like Nick felt compelled to go public. My $0.02. > On Oct 24, 2017, at 8:21 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some wACmembers. It would have been more talking to a wall. There=E2=99s a better chance the wall would listen. > I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. > During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. > Is it financial? NO! > It is cardboard related? NO! > Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice > So why? > Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. > Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. > Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. > They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. > This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information theac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. > When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcomeletter. > The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say. We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. > That=E2=99s bullshit! > The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99t want to hear from you. > For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The currentAC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. > I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. > Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. > That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. > That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. > Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out andsay I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. > Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for > Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. > The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com ================= To: OBC Ramblings , OBC Nick P Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 04:11:25 +0000 Subject: =?Windows-1252?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stic?From: Mac Wubben Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally,i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote ofmembership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it?It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Speaking didn=92t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members.It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=92s a better chance the wall would listen. I=92ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=92m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=92ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=92ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=92ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=92ve never seen this coming. That=92s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. Theyknew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue cameup just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=92t here before hewent inactive, we don=92t care what you=92ve got to say. We don=92t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=92s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=92t want to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=92t want to hear it. I=92ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=92t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =93morals clause?=94 Hell no! It=92s a mechanism to hold AC=92saccountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. That=92s why it can=92t get passed. That=92s why the ROC won=92t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=92m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=92s not expulsion I=92m looking for. It=92s not expulsion I=92m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=92sit. I=92m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=92m not the only member who thinks his way. I=92ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=92s why I=92m inactive. Nick Pelletier ================= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:10:41 -0700 To: OBC Nick P Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Rick Perfectly said! This is exactly why I have been wanting to drop out also. This was a decision bigger than the AC it should have been brought to ALL members. I am highly disappointed in the AC for not seeing that. Also somewhat disappointed in all members since no one publicly said boo. I have said controversial opinions in the past and have taken flak for it I'm a big boy I'll take it and I'll take it again. Rick Sent from my iPad > On Oct 24, 2017, at 8:21 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99s a better chance the wall would listen. > I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. > During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. > Is it financial? NO! > It is cardboard related? NO! > Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice > So why? > Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. > Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. > Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. > They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. > This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information theac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. > When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcomeletter. > The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say. We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. > That=E2=99s bullshit! > The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99t want to hear from you. > For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The currentAC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. > I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. > Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. > That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. > That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. > Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out andsay I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. > Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for > Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. > The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com ================= To: Mac Wubben Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 05:59:31 +0000 Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IFtPQkMtUmFtYmxpbmdzXSDigJxTcGVhayBzb2Z0bHkgYW5kIGNhcnJ5?From: JAY TYSVER ================= To: "'JAY TYSVER'" , Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 08:34:27 -0400 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?RE:_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=E2=9CSpeak_softl?From: "Bob Donaldson" Well said Jay. The only item I would ask is that when the monthly OBCAC announcements are made that how people voted should be recorded. Don=E2=99t just tell me it was 5-2 in favor of X, tell me how each member voted. I think we used to do this, but I do not believe we do currently. We should always. This at least give some transparency. If there are AC members whose votes you disagree with, you would then know to vote for someone else. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 2:00 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings ; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you feel this person is enough to drive you from OBC, that is your choice. Attacking the ac in a public manner probably won't change your decision and mucks up the works for all of us. If your goal is to try to bring down the ac or OBC because you wish to quit, I reiterate, that should be a personal choice not a collective one. Don't try to bring others along for the ride. That isn't fair to us. There is an opportunity to vote. Start your campaign for or against individuals, but not on the public forum. As for the actions of the ac in this instance, I was not privy to their behind the scenes discussions. I served on my HOA board and have served in management for a number of years. I know many times actions are taken after much discussion which are unpopular either way they are taken. There are plenty of shit sandwiches served. I learned to often give leadership the benefit of the doubt. Not that they are right or wrong, I just know I believe that most people intend to do things as well as they can. It's easy to ascribe motives to others. If someone hasn't expressed their motive, it's hard to know their intent. I seriously doubt the ac members wished, in any way, to harm this group. They were given a decision which was not an easy one. I'm pretty sure that bringing this decision to a fully openvote would or could have torn into the fabric of the entire group. As I said, what action is best for OBC? If I were in the ac and had to make this choice, I probably would have kept this to the ac only, as going public could have pitted member against member. At minimum the ac can be voted out. If one wishes to take actions against this individual, do so. If not, fine.But, the only actions to take against the ac would be to run for it yourself, not weaken the fabric of OBC. Jay Tysver On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:11 AM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally,i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote ofmembership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it?It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > onbehalf of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99sa better chance the wall would listen. I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the wasthat it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say.We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=E2=99s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99twant to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Notthe making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak.Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote.It holds the Ac to a standard. That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poorrules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m Nick Pelletier Nachobcards@yahoo.com ================= To: Mac Wubben , JAY TYSVER Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:05:43 +0000 Subject: =?Windows-1252?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stic?From: Taylor Schock I would question (and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC maynot have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether ornot the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was not required to makea decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was the REQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing, otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation,may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership. The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you feel this person is enough to drive you from OBC, that is your choice. Attacking the ac in a public manner probably won't change your decision and mucks up the works for all of us. If your goal is to try to bring down the ac or OBC because you wish to quit, I reiterate, that should be a personal choice not a collective one. Don't try to bring others along for the ride. That isn't fair to us. There is an opportunity to vote. Start your campaign for or against individuals, but not on the public forum. As for the actions of the ac in this instance, I was not privy to their behind the scenes discussions. I served on my HOA board and have served in management for a number of years. I know many times actions are taken after much discussion which are unpopular either way they are taken. There are plenty of shit sandwiches served. I learned to often give leadership the benefit of the doubt. Not that they are right or wrong, I just know I believe that most people intend to do things as well as they can. It's easy to ascribe motives to others. If someone hasn't expressed their motive, it's hard to know their intent. I seriously doubt the ac members wished, in any way, to harm this group. They were given a decision which was not an easy one. I'm pretty sure that bringing this decision to a fully openvote would or could have torn into the fabric of the entire group. As I said, what action is best for OBC? If I were in the ac and had to make this choice, I probably would have kept this to the ac only, as going public could have pitted member against member. At minimum the ac can be voted out. If one wishes to take actions against this individual, do so. If not, fine.But, the only actions to take against the ac would be to run for it yourself, not weaken the fabric of OBC. Jay Tysver On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:11 AM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally,i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote ofmembership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it?It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Speaking didn=92t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members.It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=92s a better chance the wall would listen. I=92ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=92m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=92ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=92ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=92ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=92ve never seen this coming. That=92s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. Theyknew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue cameup just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=92t here before hewent inactive, we don=92t care what you=92ve got to say. We don=92t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=92s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=92t want to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=92t want to hear it. I=92ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=92t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =93morals clause?=94 Hell no! It=92s a mechanism to hold AC=92saccountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. That=92s why it can=92t get passed. That=92s why the ROC won=92t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=92m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=92s not expulsion I=92m looking for. It=92s not expulsion I=92m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=92sit. I=92m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=92m not the only member who thinks his way. I=92ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=92s why I=92m inactive. Nick Pelletier ================= Date: 25 Oct 2017 14:04:28 +0000 To: Subject: Minor ramble - job related From: directorth@aol.com ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:15:53 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_?From: Ken M Taylor,   At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member...--------It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly.  That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense.  I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This deci sion took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected members of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with.   I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Taylor Schock taylor_schock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AMTo: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER;Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P;Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] “Speak softly and carry a big stick” I would question (and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here.   Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership StatusA time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former MembersAny former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] “Speak softly and carry a big stick”  Let me approach this in a judicial manner.If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful.If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring.  As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions.However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me.Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either.There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation.If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:29:12 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_s?From: I am also a former AC member in both this group and another. In my opinion, the AC's role is to protect the membership--to foster and preserve what makes OBC great--the simple pleasures of collecting sports cards and discussing the history of The Game. They are not judge and jury, but they do work with majority votes and in 25+ years that has worked pretty well. Well said Jay! There are too many differing opinions--I don't have to likeeveryone, I don't have to send cards to everyone; in fact, I can pretty much ignore the folks I choose to in the group. That is entirely my call--I simply want to enjoy a childhood hobby. It has to be fun. And to set the record straight. I was an OBC member when Doug was convicted. I did meet him--both locally in Washington and at a Cleveland National. I did not communicate with him or send a letter to the court--that was my decision. I haven't swapped cards with him--also my choice, but probably because I didn't have anything in my dup box. He has served his time, he paidhis debt to society and it appears some of us want to ostracize him as well. America is a land of second chances. Sadly, I think once Doug reads this thread, he will choose to go gently into the night. He has enjoyed OBC in histime, the escape to a little cardboard--and I doubt he would want his membership to cause a schism in this great group. I respect your decision Nick. Try to respect mine. I didn't do a count ofour members, but let's suppose we have 141 members. Suppose the membershipvote was 71 to 70 (and we can't get everyone to vote for the AC so I doubtwe would have 100% participation, but anyway)--would you have accepted that vote? What might that have accomplished? Makes me wonder with the tenorof your letter. Peter Mead -----Original Message----- From: JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings ; OBC Nick P Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 1:59 am Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you feel this person is enough to drive you from OBC, that is your choice. Attacking the ac in a public manner probably won't change your decision and mucks up the works for all of us. If your goal is to try to bring down the ac or OBC because you wish to quit, I reiterate, that should be a personal choice not a collective one. Don't try to bring others along for the ride. That isn't fair to us. There is an opportunity to vote. Start your campaign for or against individuals, but not on the public forum. As for the actions of the ac in this instance, I was not privy to their behind the scenes discussions. I served on my HOA board and have served in management for a number of years. I know many times actions are taken after much discussion which are unpopular either way they are taken. There are plenty of shit sandwiches served. I learned to often give leadership the benefit of the doubt. Not that they are right or wrong, I just know I believe that most people intend to do things as well as they can. It's easy to ascribe motives to others. If someone hasn't expressed their motive, it's hard to know their intent. I seriously doubt the ac members wished, in any way, to harm this group. They were given a decision which was not an easy one. I'm pretty sure that bringing this decision to a fully openvote would or could have torn into the fabric of the entire group. As I said, what action is best for OBC? If I were in the ac and had to make this choice, I probably would have kept this to the ac only, as going public could have pitted member against member. At minimum the ac can be voted out. If one wishes to take actions against this individual, do so. If not, fine.But, the only actions to take against the ac would be to run for it yourself, not weaken the fabric of OBC. Jay Tysver On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:11 AM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally,i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote ofmembership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it?It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. From:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of OBC Nick Pnachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99sa better chance the wall would listen. I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the wasthat it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say.We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=E2=99s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99twant to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Notthe making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak.Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote.It holds the Ac to a standard. That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poorrules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m Nick Pelletier ================= To: JAY TYSVER Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:36:44 +0000 Subject: =?Windows-1252?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stic?From: Taylor Schock My apologies regarding the "OBC Inactive Membership Status" below. It was pointed out to me that this was amended on 8/8 and the 3 years was NOT in place at the time. It was a simple ask to and AC member and you're back in. So the rules at the time were followed. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Taylor Schock taylor_schock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 9:05 AM To: Mac Wubben; JAY TYSVER Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 I would question (and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC maynot have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether ornot the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was not required to makea decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was the REQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing, otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation,may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership. The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you feel this person is enough to drive you from OBC, that is your choice. Attacking the ac in a public manner probably won't change your decision and mucks up the works for all of us. If your goal is to try to bring down the ac or OBC because you wish to quit, I reiterate, that should be a personal choice not a collective one. Don't try to bring others along for the ride. That isn't fair to us. There is an opportunity to vote. Start your campaign for or against individuals, but not on the public forum. As for the actions of the ac in this instance, I was not privy to their behind the scenes discussions. I served on my HOA board and have served in management for a number of years. I know many times actions are taken after much discussion which are unpopular either way they are taken. There are plenty of shit sandwiches served. I learned to often give leadership the benefit of the doubt. Not that they are right or wrong, I just know I believe that most people intend to do things as well as they can. It's easy to ascribe motives to others. If someone hasn't expressed their motive, it's hard to know their intent. I seriously doubt the ac members wished, in any way, to harm this group. They were given a decision which was not an easy one. I'm pretty sure that bringing this decision to a fully openvote would or could have torn into the fabric of the entire group. As I said, what action is best for OBC? If I were in the ac and had to make this choice, I probably would have kept this to the ac only, as going public could have pitted member against member. At minimum the ac can be voted out. If one wishes to take actions against this individual, do so. If not, fine.But, the only actions to take against the ac would be to run for it yourself, not weaken the fabric of OBC. Jay Tysver On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:11 AM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally,i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote ofmembership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it?It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Speaking didn=92t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members.It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=92s a better chance the wall would listen. I=92ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=92m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. During this time I=92ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=92ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. Is it financial? NO! It is cardboard related? NO! Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice So why? Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=92ve got to think. Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. They say they could=92ve never seen this coming. That=92s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. Theyknew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue cameup just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcome letter. The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=92t here before hewent inactive, we don=92t care what you=92ve got to say. We don=92t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. That=92s bullshit! The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=92t want to hear from you. For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=92t want to hear it. I=92ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=92t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. Is this a =93morals clause?=94 Hell no! It=92s a mechanism to hold AC=92saccountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. That=92s why it can=92t get passed. That=92s why the ROC won=92t be updated. Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and say I=92m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=92s not expulsion I=92m looking for. It=92s not expulsion I=92m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=92sit. I=92m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=92m not the only member who thinks his way. I=92ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=92s why I=92m inactive. Nick Pelletier ================= To: "'Ken M'" , Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 11:17:06 -0400 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?RE:_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=E2=9CSpeak_softl?From: "Bob Donaldson" Thanks for the clarification. As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me thatthey all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All hadthe best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision,maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months towork out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address.I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standingby... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to makea decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees willbe documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation,may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVERJTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is becauseit was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act aroundthat individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:30:42 -0400 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtPQkMtUmFtYmxpbmdzXSDigJxTcGVhayBzb2Z0bHkgYW5kIGNhcnJ5IGEgYmlnIA==?From: Ed Hutchinson I wish to weigh in now- because this issue almost caused me to leave the I am a teacher, and the thought of being affiliated with someone who had perpetrated a crime against children was not only repugnant to me, but called into question my job- would it come back, very bluntly, to get me fired if anyone found out that I was in a group with a sex offender? I talked at length to several members of this fine group- both AC and non AC members, and I made my own decision. I would stay in OBC because the good far outweighs the bad. I would stay in OBC because my friends, good people, had explained to me the situation and I felt comfortable with it. Nick, and others- you may not feel comfortable with the situation. If that is the case, I do encourage you to keep bringing it up and discussing it with people- but do so in a private manner- calling others out, and bashing part of, or the entire, AC, will do nothing but possibly divide, and even break, this fine group. To quote the musical 1776 "We are men, no more, no less." I encourage everyone to make their own decision regarding what is more important to you- the friendships of OBC, or one situation that you do not agree with -steps off soap box- Ed Hutchinson On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:21 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. > It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99s a better > the wall would listen. > I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using > inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. > During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am > inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions > telling them why I am inactive. > Is it financial? NO! > It is cardboard related? NO! > Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice > So why? > Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not > care what you=E2=99ve got to think. > Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the > membership. > Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. > They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some > members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They > knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came > up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it > would be a controversial issue. > This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial > issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information > the ac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed > doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is > how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. > When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current > membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to > comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a > welcome letter. > The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before > went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say. We don=E2=99t care what > you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. > That=E2=99s bullshit! > The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. > There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99t > want to hear from you. > For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The current > AC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. > I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story > short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not > the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let > an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. > Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted > way. Again, big scary thing. > Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s > accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come > back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be > pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to > a standard. > That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. > That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. > Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out and > say I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. > Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion > I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=E2=99s > I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. > Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait > for it....membership. > Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know > I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you > individually via email, phone, or text. > The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m > inactive. > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 08:27:49 -0700 To: hoot_owl1@verizon.net Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Rick Won't speak for Nick but for myself I very much would have accepted the vote 71-70 but then that would of gave me the opportunity to chose for myself if I wanted to be apart of this group before he came back. I'm not questioning that the rules state all an ex member has to do is inform the AC and your in. I'm questioning "for every rule there is an exception" this should have applied here. My biggest problem with hiding behind just "ask and your in" is how you can justify he left "in good standing" that was the AC's outand it wasn't used. What constitutes in good standing because someone didn't use the address list to come and steal our collection everything else isgood? So yes I do feel like this was just rammed down our throats. This also has potential bigger ramifications outside of OBC that would have been easy to predict just look at history. Rick Sent from my iPad > On Oct 25, 2017, at 7:29 AM, hoot_owl1@verizon.net [OBC-Ramblings] > I am also a former AC member in both this group and another. In my opinion, the AC's role is to protect the membership--to foster and preserve whatmakes OBC great--the simple pleasures of collecting sports cards and discussing the history of The Game. They are not judge and jury, but they do work with majority votes and in 25+ years that has worked pretty well. > Well said Jay! There are too many differing opinions--I don't have to like everyone, I don't have to send cards to everyone; in fact, I can pretty much ignore the folks I choose to in the group. That is entirely my call--I simply want to enjoy a childhood hobby. It has to be fun. > And to set the record straight. I was an OBC member when Doug was convicted. I did meet him--both locally in Washington and at a Cleveland National. I did not communicate with him or send a letter to the court--that was mydecision. I haven't swapped cards with him--also my choice, but probably because I didn't have anything in my dup box. He has served his time, he paid his debt to society and it appears some of us want to ostracize him as well. > America is a land of second chances. Sadly, I think once Doug reads this thread, he will choose to go gently into the night. He has enjoyed OBC in his time, the escape to a little cardboard--and I doubt he would want his membership to cause a schism in this great group. > I respect your decision Nick. Try to respect mine. I didn't do a count of our members, but let's suppose we have 141 members. Suppose the membership vote was 71 to 70 (and we can't get everyone to vote for the AC so I doubt we would have 100% participation, but anyway)--would you have accepted that vote? What might that have accomplished? Makes me wonder with the tenor of your letter. > Respectfully, > Peter Mead > -----Original Message----- > From: JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > To: Mac Wubben > Cc: OBC Ramblings ; OBC Nick P > Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 1:59 am > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that lawcan and should be enforced. However, if there were a law passed after thataction occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member bea part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the dictates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow othersto influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum isnot the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you feel this person is enough to drive you from OBC, that is your choice. Attacking the ac in a public manner probably won't change your decision and mucks up the works for all of us. If your goal is to try to bring down the ac or OBC because you wish to quit, I reiterate, that should be a personal choice not a collective one. Don't try to bring others along for the ride. That isn't fair to us. > There is an opportunity to vote. Start your campaign for or against individuals, but not on the public forum. > As for the actions of the ac in this instance, I was not privy to their behind the scenes discussions. I served on my HOA board and have served in management for a number of years. I know many times actions are taken after much discussion which are unpopular either way they are taken. There are plenty of shit sandwiches served. I learned to often give leadership the benefit of the doubt. Not that they are right or wrong, I just know I believe that most people intend to do things as well as they can. > It's easy to ascribe motives to others. If someone hasn't expressed theirmotive, it's hard to know their intent. I seriously doubt the ac members wished, in any way, to harm this group. They were given a decision which wasnot an easy one. I'm pretty sure that bringing this decision to a fully open vote would or could have torn into the fabric of the entire group. As I said, what action is best for OBC? If I were in the ac and had to make thischoice, I probably would have kept this to the ac only, as going public could have pitted member against member. At minimum the ac can be voted out. > If one wishes to take actions against this individual, do so. If not, fine.. But, the only actions to take against the ac would be to run for it yourself, not weaken the fabric of OBC. > Jay Tysver > On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:11 AM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Former ac member here...although i think the ac does a great job generally, i agree with nick that any member should be able to request a full vote of membership on an issue...maybe a petition with 10 members signing onto it? It would seem easy enough to handle and i think this would fully address nick's concern. Love to hear other thoughts on it. > Mac > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:21:49 PM > To: OBC Ramblings > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Speaking didn=E2=99t work. STICK TIME! I tried talking with some AC members. It would have been more product talking to a wall. There=E2=99s a better chance the wall would listen. > I=E2=99ve been on the inactive list for a couple months. I=E2=99m using the inactive time to seriously consider leaving OBC. > During this time I=E2=99ve had a few people contact me about why I am inactive. I=E2=99ve also reached out to a few people asking their opinions and telling them why I am inactive. > Is it financial? NO! > It is cardboard related? NO! > Is it time related? NO! Though more hours in a day would be nice > So why? > Because the AC (not all seven, but enough) is lying to you and they do not care what you=E2=99ve got to think. > Because the AC (again not all seven, but enough) is hiding from the membership. > Recently the AC brought back an inactive member. > They say they could=E2=99ve never seen this coming. That=E2=99s a pile of it. Some members have stayed in contact with the individual over the years. They knew what was coming. They knew when it was coming. The exact issue came up just a few years ago in the ac. The only agreement the was that it would be a controversial issue. > This year, the only agreement by the Ac was that it was a controversial issue. Rather than ask the full group for input, ideas, and Information theac(not all seven, but enough) decided to act alone, behind closed doors, without any knowledge of anybody else. When the ONLY agreement is how controversial something is, more input needs to be sought. > When the now active member went inactive one-third of the current membership was not a part of this group. They were given no opportunity to comment or share their opinion. They were given no heads up other than a welcomeletter. > The AC told one third of our group, 50 members who weren=E2=99t here before he went inactive, we don=E2=99t care what you=E2=99ve got to say. We don=E2=99t care what you think. He gets to come back because he sent cards out two decades ago. > That=E2=99s bullshit! > The current ROC allows four people, the majority of an AC to run Obc. There is zero accountability and even less transparency. The ac doesn=E2=99t want to hear from you. > For such controversial issues there needs to be transparency. The currentAC (not all seven, but enough) doesn=E2=99t want to hear it. > I=E2=99ve been asked for a proposal, a way to solve the issue. Long story short, anybody coming back would need to go through an application. Not the making trades and mentor and everything. Fill out an application. Let an announcement go out and give membership, everybody, a chance to speak. Nope, the AC can=E2=99t have that. Let the votes show by name who voted which way. Again, big scary thing. > Is this a =E2=9Cmorals clause?=E2=9D Hell no! It=E2=99s a mechanism to hold AC=E2=99s accountable when the next murderer, sex Offender, or thief wants to come back. It lets the group, the whole group, share information that may be pertinent to the situation. It does so before a vote. It holds the Ac to a standard. > That=E2=99s why it can=E2=99t get passed. > That=E2=99s why the ROC won=E2=99t be updated. > Your AC (not all, but enough) have done everything but come right out andsay I=E2=99m the bad guy for not waiving the welcome flag for a sex Offender. Damn right! Yet it=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for. Simply fixing the poor rules of conduct.....that=E2=99s it. I=E2=99m the bad guy for thinking membership gives a damn about membership? > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO DIFFICULT. > GROUP DISCUSSION AND INVOLVEMENT SHOULN NOT BE SO SCARRY. > Not for every issue.....membership issues should have input from....wait for > Contact your AC. Tell them what you think. Fill their inboxes. I know I=E2=99m not the only member who thinks his way. I=E2=99ve talked with some of you individually via email, phone, or text. > The AC (not all, but enough) have pushed me away. That=E2=99s why I=E2=99m > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com ================= To: Bob Donaldson , 'Ken M' , Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:33:21 -0500 Subject: =?utf-8?Q?RE:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stick?From: mark zentkovich Amen, brother bob- My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful consideration These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Thanks for the clarification. As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to methat they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, weshould just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No.. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and youget what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to floodit telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimessketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whetherthe AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, thatany 'special circumstances' were noted). Alsothe AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily evenapply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to'reapply'? WastheREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees willbe documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, whowas in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is becauseit was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act aroundthat individual. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 11:47:07 -0400 To: mark zentkovich Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Jake Brewer Even though I'm one of the newest Members, I'll chime in since it is a big discussion. 1. Did I ever think I'd be associated with a known sex offender in a baseball card group? 2. Do I think the OBCAC handled it okay? Sort of, I mean they did give me the choice whether I wanted to send/receive cards from him- but now I guess I'm associated with him via the group (being a part of OBC) which wasn't my choice. 3. Will This affect my enjoyment of OBC? No, as long as the group continues to exist, and I get to send/receive cards from other people I enjoy being associated with very much. 4. Does this raise any concerns for me at all? As long as the group continues to exist, not really. The one question it does bring to my mind though: How is it harder (atleast per rules/requirements) for new people to join OBC- as opposed to a known sex offender? In what corner of the world does that make sense?? That being put out there, I love OBC and what it represents (well most of it now) and I hope it continues to exist for a long time. Collecting wouldn't be the same without it. -Jake "The Kid" Brewer Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] > Amen, brother bob- > My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. > My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. > My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. > I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after carefulconsideration > These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well > And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM > To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Ken > Thanks for the clarification. > As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike aboutthis issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the otherOBCAC.. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but becausethey all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. > Thanks > Bob > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM > To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Taylor, > At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not theopinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... > -------- > It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of mylongest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or thosefriendships is not something I take lightly. > That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger thanit is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. > I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in andforce him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any inputis not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. Ilost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you getwhat I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. > I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood ittelling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by.... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM > To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; > Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; > Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whetheror not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, thatany 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entiregroup in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. > Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) > OBC Inactive Membership Status > A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to getconfirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. Afterthe contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. > Former Members > Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. > Regards, > Taylor > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn..com [OBC-Ramblings] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM > To: Mac Wubben > Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that lawcan and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member bea part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow othersto influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum isnot the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 10:37:26 -0400 To: Tom Housley Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Minor ramble - job related From: Joel Freedman Tom, maybe you can get Nacho a job, so that he will have less time opining about how poor a job the OBCAC is doing. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:04 AM, directorth@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Guys, > I've been fairly quiet the past couple of months (with the exception of my > "hey, look at me, I'm going to California!" posts). > I had a gut-punch in late August. For the 2nd time in almost exactly 5 > years, I found myself out of a job - laid off because the ad agency I > worked for wasn't making enough money, and thus they didn't need two > producers (never mind that the reason they weren't making money was the > fault of the one sales person they had - who somehow kept losing clients > with no accountability). > Frankly, other than the very real uncertainty of when I would begin making > money again, I wasn't as disappointed as you might think. Frankly, things > were so slow that I was bored out of my mind for most of the last year. > And, I did have the cushion that I would receive 5 weeks severance, so my > deadline to find something else wasn't immediate. > A couple of days after my forced benching, I got a tip from a former > co-worker about a producer position at the local ABC/Fox affiliate. As it > turns out, that very day the position of Commercial Production Manager also > opened up at the same station. I aimed high and applied for that one, even > though I had no management experience. Long story short, I got that job. I > started here October 9th, so I've been adjusting to that new role. > It's funny how this business can be circular. My first job out of college > was running Master Control at a brand new TV station - WRGT, then an > independent & eventually a Fox affiliate when that network was born. From > there I went to WKEF (then an NBC affiliate) for 5 years. Well, now WKEF is > the ABC affiliate, and is co-managed with WRGT. Get the connection? The > current ABC/Fox affiliate. So I now work for two stations I used to work > for. It's a new building, but some of the same people are here, as are some > of my former co-workers from WHIO. And it feels right to be working at a TV > station again. > I only mentioned my unemployment to one OBCer because, well, I'm not sure > why. Maybe I didn't want to burden the group, maybe I felt I might get pity > which I didn't want, or maybe I was just keeping it quiet for no good > reason. But I knew even if I did bring it up in a Ramble, I would receive > overwhelming support from you guys. So I knew you had my back, even if I > never told you. > Ramble over. Thanks for reading. > Tom H. ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:18:46 -0400 To: mark zentkovich Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=93Speak_softly_and_c?From: David Luciano I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. This is what I sent them if you care. What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=92t mean Rose in the HOF) I know I am a new guy but I don=92t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=92t want to put more pressure on the group. Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All ouraddresses are here. After I got multiple responses, To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. I feel for you guys in charge. We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and mostimportant for the victims. Thanks for the information I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in oursociety. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] > Amen, brother bob- > My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =91trust the process=92 of the AC. > My first reaction when seeing nick=92s note last night was the same. > My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. > I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after carefulconsideration > These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well > And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=85then get back to playing with our cardboard > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM > To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > Ken > Thanks for the clarification. > As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike aboutthis issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=92m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. > Thanks > Bob > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM > To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > Taylor, > At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not theopinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... > -------- > It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of mylongest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or thosefriendships is not something I take lightly. > That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger thanit is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. > I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in andforce him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any inputis not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. Ilost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you getwhat I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. > I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood ittelling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standingby. > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM > To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; > Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; > Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whetheror not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, thatany 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entiregroup in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. > Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) > OBC Inactive Membership Status > A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to getconfirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. Afterthe contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. > Former Members > Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. > Regards, > Taylor > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM > To: Mac Wubben > Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that lawcan and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member bea part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow othersto influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum isnot the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you f ================= To: Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:26:19 -0400 Subject: OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 From: "Bob Donaldson" Well, it is finally that time of year. The OBC holiday card exchange. For those of you who are new, or have bad memories, the holiday exchange is when participants are randomly assigned the name of another participant to buy and mail a gift to the person they have been assigned to. On December 25th - Christmas for some, just after of Hanukkah ( I believe), the winter solstice or Yule for pagans (not sure if we have any pagans) or just a fun day to get a gift. Rules (the fine print) 1. Gifts should be in the $10 range. The best gifts are not usually the most expensive. Try to get creative. 2. Envelopes should be clearly marked "do not open to Dec 25" or "Do not open till Xmas". 3. Open your present on the morning of the 25th 4. Report your present and who gave it to you on the ramblings server How it works. 1. REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL (please do not send a new message as it may miss my email filter), put your name in the message, that will make it easier to track things. Or send an email to me with " OBC Xmas Exchange 2017" in the subject. Please include your name just to make sure I don't mix up your email address. Please make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 is in the subject line! That makes it easy to track. 2. Wait a few days for a message from me telling you who your victim is based on a patented semi-randomization technique, 3. Buy something nice, wrap it, mark it "do not open" till the 25th, and send it out. NOTE: We are running a little late this year so hurry up and respond. I will try to get assignments out ASAP Merry Christmas! FINAL PLEA - Please make my life easier!!!! Reply to this email or make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 is in the subject Give your FULL first AND last name in the message of your email Thanks and have fun!! Bob Donaldson ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" , Ken M Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 17:54:49 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show From: richard dingman I'm going to try to be there Friday early for just a couple hours, but will likely also be there Saturday early too. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 10:34 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show Unfortunately, I'm likely a no show for this one. I have no money and most likely even less time between work and the kids. More bad news: my plans toattend the next Philly show are also scrapped. Two of the three other (full time) guys at work are going the same week. As sort of my revenge, I put in for Christmas week instead. Ho Ho Ho! Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com Date: Tue, Oct 24, 2017 10:06 PM To: Bob Donaldson; Cc: OBC Ramblings; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Shriner's Show Plan to be there all Saturday morning! I've found plenty of great stuff in Wilmington and knock wood that the well's not dry yet. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:47 PM 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > The Shriner=92s show in Wilmington MA is next week. By far the best show in New England. Info is here http://www.gbscc.com/2017-show/ Anyone going? ================= Date: 25 Oct 2017 18:11:54 +0000 To: Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stick=E2=9D?From: ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:16:58 -0400 To: Tom Housley Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC=2DRamblings=5D_Re=3A_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Joel Freedman OBC rules at the time were simple, send and email and you are back to active. The AC struggled with this. We all knew we had to do something. As a member of the AC, I will weigh in with my thought and my approach to this issue. Thus, transparency. There is a public process for allowing sex offenders back into society. It is to notify the people in the neighborhood of their whereabouts. They are given a second chance to be part of society, but with some safeguards in place. I wanted the same for members of OBC. We created a "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" category on the external directory page. We identified internally on the members page, RSO. Via email we sent out Doug's letter. Then we tightened the returning member rules. Seven months later, we continue to discuss this topic, with potentially elimination of the inactive list and having all reapply. But as we look at this, it does not go far enough. An RSO or felon could still be let in to the club or be among us. Do we really want to perform background checks on ourselves and our members at some frequency? Even background checks have their issues. Who decides who is let in and if there is a felon among us, who decides they should be forced out? So one can see these topics are not simple and there are holes in our rules. There are holes and law changes in society. My lone comment on "the membership should decide" is...... The eight AC members were elected by the membership to make decisions for the group. We applied the knowledge and experience each has gained in their lives to deal with this issue. Unfortunately there are no guidelines for what should be brought to the membership, thus we believe we chose the best course of action for OBC. Joel Freedman OBC - 2004 On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:11 PM, directorth@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > To Taylor's point of whether the AC followed the ROC - as a former AC > member & Facilitator, I had a chance to review the ROC several times during > my tenure, especially when a former member re-applied; I do believe the AC > interpreted and followed the rule correctly. > There is a clause in the ROC that says: > "Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his > resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory > committee his desire to be returned to active membership. The request will > then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next > meeting of the committee." > The phrase "in good standing" has always seemed very vague. Does it mean > in good standing with the group, that is, as a good "trader"? Does it cover > behavior outside the group? My belief is that, somehow, that phrase needs > to be clarified. > The member in question was on the inactive list & not forcibly removed > when he was incarcerated, and therefore stayed Inactive for many years. > A few years ago in the annual Membership Poll, it was determined that ALL > members, Inactive or not, were required to respond to the poll, and several > members were dropped for not replying (that requirement has since been > modified, of course, to move non-responders to Inactive. That's whole other > kettle of fish). That didn't happen with the member in question, who for > obvious reasons, could not reply. I can't explain why that was. Similarly, > in the one instance in the last 15 years where payment of dues was > required, non-payment of dues (or failure to plead hardship & have dues > waived) was cause for removal. Any member dropped for non-payment could > request re-admission but was required to make the dues payment. The member > in question could not pay dues, but perhaps someone paid for him. > But, given the ROC clause above (which was last revised in 1997), it > appears to me the current AC did follow the rules in place. I am certain - > scratch that, I know for a fact - that they struggled mightily with the > decision they faced and made the best overall decision they could. > To the basic core of Nick's e-mail: > Nick states that only 4 members control the AC. Well, that's the way it > is, really; with 7 members, a majority of 4 rules in any vote. There's no > way OBC could become a true town-meeting type of group, with the entire > membership polled for every tough decision. After all, making the tough > decisions on behalf of all of us is why the AC exists. Could the ROC be > revised to require more than simple majority for someone wishing to return? > That's a discussion that might be worth having, whether it be a requirement > that the vote be a clear 7-0, or maybe a 5-vote requirement. Want that to > be the case? If so, suggest it to an AC member to consider during an > upcoming discussion period. > There is more than a hint in Nick's e-mail of some sinister skullduggery > by the current AC and past ACs to try and keep the member in question > active, only to re-activate him as some sort of Manchurian candidate time > bomb - to backdoor him back into the group when the time came. No one > conspired in this way. Perhaps we/they were shortsighted and didn't think > the inactive member would ever come back, but none of us can be all-knowing. > I like Nick. He's wickedly funny and a generous OBC member. To an extent I > agree with some of his feelings in this matter. I would hate to lose any > member of this group over what we all know is a devise, difficult decision, > but each of us has to make up his own mind. There isn't any way that all > 130ish of us will ever agree to one way of thinking on this specific issue. > Finally, I do applaud the AC for the revision to the Inactive list. Is it > perfect? No, of course not. But it is a good compromise, and I hope it > works well. > Bottom line, this issue had many shades of gray, and it wasn't an easy > decision, I'm sure. > Tom H. ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:25:37 -0400 To: daveluciano@me.com, mzentko@yahoo.com Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_s?From: Mike Glasser My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings upas I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the matter. From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be peoplewho don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you riskalienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the abilityto edit who I deal with for whatever reason. I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversationabout issues like this. OBC Rules! Mike Glasser The Goddard School in Sparks, MD 14630 York Road Sparks, MD 21152 -----Original Message----- From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: mark zentkovich Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. This is what I sent them if you care. What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I wouldlike to know who and what. I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All ouraddresses are here. After I got multiple responses, To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. I feel for you guys in charge. We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and mostimportant for the victims. Thanks for the information I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in oursociety. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] Amen, brother bob- My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful consideration These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Thanks for the clarification. As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me thatthey all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All hadthe best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision,maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. NowI'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months towork out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address.I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standingby... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to makea decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees willbe documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation,may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is becauseit was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act aroundthat individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:46:23 -0700 To: OBC Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_softly_and_carry_a_big?From: Geordie Calvert I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responses ofseveral members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I havein the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedbackfrom the group at large. At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to counthim as a friend. Peace, brothers. > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - > Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings up as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the matter. > From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you risk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. > I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that theyknow all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. > My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. > I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. > OBC Rules! > Mike > Mike Glasser > Owner > The Goddard School in Sparks, MD > 14630 York Road > Sparks, MD 21152 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] > To: mark zentkovich > Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings > Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > Hello, > I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. > This is what I sent them if you care. > What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) > =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= > Hello, > I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. > I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going todisclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. > Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All our addresses are here. > ----------------------------------------------------- > After I got multiple responses, > Thanks, > To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. > I feel for you guys in charge. > We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. > We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. > We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and most important for the victims. > Thanks for the information > I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going tohave another one soon. > =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= > What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in our > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] > Amen, brother bob- > My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. > My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. > My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. > I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after carefulconsideration > These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well > And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM > To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Ken > Thanks for the clarification. > As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike aboutthis issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the otherOBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. > Thanks > Bob > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM > To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Taylor, > At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not theopinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... > -------- > It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of mylongest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or thosefriendships is not something I take lightly. > That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger thanit is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. > I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in andforce him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any inputis not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. Ilost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you getwhat I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. > I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood ittelling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standingby. > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM > To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; > Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; > Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whetheror not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, thatany 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entiregroup in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. > Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) > OBC Inactive Membership Status > A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to getconfirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. Afterthe contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. > Former Members > Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. > Regards, > Taylor > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM > To: Mac Wubben > Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that lawcan and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member bea part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow othersto influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum isnot the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 17:18:42 -0400 To: Geordie Calvert Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=93Speak_softly_and_c?From: David Luciano Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. John Facenda, from NFL Films One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler. Tryturning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m Luke 6 Love Your Enemies 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[b]either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those whodo good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, forhe is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. Judging Others 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it willbe given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher,but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. > First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responses ofseveral members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I havein the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. > I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedbackfrom the group at large. > At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to count him as a friend. > Peace, brothers. > Geordie > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - >> Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick bringsup as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in thematter. >> From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you risk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. >> I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. >> My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. >> I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. >> OBC Rules! >> Mike >> Mike Glasser >> Owner >> The Goddard School in Sparks, MD >> 14630 York Road >> Sparks, MD 21152 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] >> To: mark zentkovich >> Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings >> Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm >> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 >> Hello, >> I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. >> This is what I sent them if you care. >> What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) >> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= >> Hello, >> I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. >> I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. >> Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All our addresses are here. >> ----------------------------------------------------- >> After I got multiple responses, >> Thanks, >> To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. >> I feel for you guys in charge. >> We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. >> We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. >> We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and most important for the victims. >> Thanks for the information >> I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. >> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= >> What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in our >> Thanks! >> Dave Luciano >> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >> Chesterland, Ohio >> 44026 >> 216 406 5940 >> daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] >> Amen, brother bob- >> My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. >> My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. >> My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. >> I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful >> These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well >> And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard >> Mark Zentkovich >> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >> From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM >> To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >> Ken >> Thanks for the clarification. >> As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but becausethey all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. >> Thanks >> Bob >> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM >> To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >> Taylor, >> At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... >> -------- >> It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. >> That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on theshelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could careless what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. >> I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three monthsto work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membershipwasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. Theyexpressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel weput measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. >> I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, >> Ken M >> Sent from my not so smart phone. >> http://kenmorganti.weebly.com >> ------ Original message------ >> From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >> Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM >> To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; >> Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; >> Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >> I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the ACmay not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. >> Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) >> OBC Inactive Membership Status >> A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3)years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will beremoved from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. >> Former Members >> Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committeehis desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of thecommittee. >> Regards, >> Taylor >> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM >> To: Mac Wubben >> Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P >> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >> Let me approach this in a judicial manner. >> If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. >> If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. >> As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fullyexplain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This personserved a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue tojudge or punish this individual, that is their choice. >> I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyonefor their crimes? Why not just kill them all? >> As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. >> If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of therules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. Ithink this person will understand your feelings by your actions. >> However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs toeach individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. >> Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let'snot use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. >> There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If youwish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. >> If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 16:41:12 -0500 To: David Luciano Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: OBC Nick P So I opened a can of worms and a lot of people are chiming in. Great! Fantstic! First thing I=E2=99ve got to jump on. A lot of people are using names. I didn=E2=99t use any names. No names are needed. Names don=E2=99tmatter. This is not about names. If you think this is about names, you missed the point. A lot of responses have me trying to kick somebody out. Where the hell didthat come from? Did you miss my statement in the fourth to the last paragraph...=E2=9Dit=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for.=E2=9D If you think I=E2=99m trying to have somebody removed, you missed the point. The point is the rules of conduct. Any individual name is simply how the holes in the ROC were exposed. Not any individual. For example, what is =E2=9Cgood standing?=E2=9D If you don=E2=99towe somebody a 1979 Larry Gura? Not slapping sense into somebody? Going to prison? Dry docking a deuce in a members throne? A very good question was asked in one of the many responses.....why is it easier for a registered sex offender to get into the group than a new guy? The new guy just sent cards out. The new guy just made trades. The new guy has a mentor. The new guy has a probation period. The registered sex offender had a check in date to stay out of prison. Both are largely unknowneither by being a new guy or by being away for however long. If that doesn=E2=99t make you wonder...... We are clearly not opposed to having group comments on new guys. More thanhalf our inactives have been gone more than six years. Do we really know anything about them anymore....nope! Let=E2=99s do it for returning guys. Most we really need to reacquaint ourselves with anyway. If you wish to make this about any individual, that=E2=99s on you. You missed my point. If you wish to see the ROC for the Swiss cheese it is....there you go! That=E2=99s the point. Nick Pelletier > On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:18 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, > Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. > "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. > John Facenda, from NFL Films > One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. > 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler. Try turning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. > And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. > Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m trying. > Luke 6 > Love Your Enemies > 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from onewho takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[b]either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. > 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what creditis that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. > Judging Others > 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D > 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. >> First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strongdebate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responsesof several members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I have in the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. >> I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration.I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shockedif the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedbackfrom the group at large. >> At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one ofus. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has beenfor the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to count him as a friend. >> Peace, brothers. >> Geordie >>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>> My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - >>> Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings up as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the >>> From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed todo - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you risk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especiallywhen there is controversy. >>> I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. >>> My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. >>> I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. >>> OBC Rules! >>> Mike >>> Mike Glasser >>> Owner >>> The Goddard School in Sparks, MD >>> 14630 York Road >>> Sparks, MD 21152 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>> To: mark zentkovich >>> Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings >>> Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm >>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 >>> Hello, >>> I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted toknow what was going on. I know now. >>> This is what I sent them if you care. >>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) >>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>> Hello, >>> I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. >>> I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. >>> Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. Allour addresses are here. >>> ----------------------------------------------------- >>> After I got multiple responses, >>> Thanks, >>> To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are upagainst. >>> I feel for you guys in charge. >>> We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. >>> We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. >>> We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and most important for the victims. >>> Thanks for the information >>> I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. >>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing inour >>> Thanks! >>> Dave Luciano >>> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >>> Chesterland, Ohio >>> 44026 >>> 216 406 5940 >>> daveluciano@me.com >>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>> [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] >>> Amen, brother bob- >>> My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. >>> My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. >>> My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. >>> I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful >>> These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their futuredirection as well >>> And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard >>> Mark Zentkovich >>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >>> From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM >>> To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>> Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>> Ken >>> Thanks for the clarification. >>> As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. Allhad the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guysagain, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but onethat I believe was fair. >>> Thanks >>> Bob >>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM >>> To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>> Taylor, >>> At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back.Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... >>> -------- >>> It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part ofme since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. >>> That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. >>> I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about itanother way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No.I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that severalof my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. >>> I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by.. TAYL, >>> Ken M >>> Sent from my not so smart phone. >>> http://kenmorganti.weebly.com >>> ------ Original message------ >>> From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>> Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM >>> To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; >>> Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; >>> Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>> I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarilyeven apply here. >>> Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcomeback" announcement? (again, I don't remember) >>> OBC Inactive Membership Status >>> A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membershipapplication to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. >>> Former Members >>> Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the >>> Regards, >>> Taylor >>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM >>> To: Mac Wubben >>> Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P >>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>> Let me approach this in a judicial manner. >>> If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. >>> If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. >>> As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case andcould make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. >>> I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? >>> As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. >>> If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this timewhich require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. >>> However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of aganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I seethey are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. >>> Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on thisforum makes no sense either. >>> There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. >>> If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 18:28:41 -0400 To: OBC Nick P Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=93Speak_softly_and_c?From: David Luciano For the record if that "kicked out" was meant for my comment, I said that because maybe this group wasn=E2=99t the right place to wear my religion on my sleeve, however I saw it as a opportunity to try to make this world a little better especially with some of the comments from fellow If it wasn=E2=99t towards me. I apologize. I shouldn=E2=99t even be in this mess=E2=A6 I don=E2=99t even knowwhat ROC is. Go Tribe=E2=A6oh ya maybe next year. Enjoy the game tonight. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:41 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > So I opened a can of worms and a lot of people are chiming in. Great! Fantstic! > First thing I=E2=99ve got to jump on. A lot of people are using names. I didn=E2=99t use any names. No names are needed. Names don=E2=99t matter. This is not about names. If you think this is about names, you missed the point. > A lot of responses have me trying to kick somebody out. Where the hell did that come from? Did you miss my statement in the fourth to the last paragraph...=E2=9Dit=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for.=E2=9D If you think I=E2=99m trying to have somebody removed, you missed the point. > The point is the rules of conduct. Any individual name is simply how theholes in the ROC were exposed. Not any individual. > For example, what is =E2=9Cgood standing?=E2=9D If you don=E2=99t owe somebody a 1979 Larry Gura? Not slapping sense into somebody? Going to prison? Dry docking a deuce in a members throne? > A very good question was asked in one of the many responses.....why is iteasier for a registered sex offender to get into the group than a new guy?The new guy just sent cards out. The new guy just made trades. The new guy has a mentor. The new guy has a probation period. The registered sex offender had a check in date to stay out of prison. Both are largely unknown either by being a new guy or by being away for however long. > If that doesn=E2=99t make you wonder...... > We are clearly not opposed to having group comments on new guys. More than half our inactives have been gone more than six years. Do we really know anything about them anymore....nope! Let=E2=99s do it for returning guys. Most we really need to reacquaint ourselves with anyway. > If you wish to make this about any individual, that=E2=99s on you. You missed my point. > If you wish to see the ROC for the Swiss cheese it is....there you go! That=E2=99s the point. > ROC > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:18 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, >> Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. >> "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. >> John Facenda, from NFL Films >> One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. >> 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler. Try turning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. >> And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. >> Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m trying. >> Luke 6 >> Love Your Enemies >> 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[b]either. 30 Give toeveryone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. >> 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you?For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as yourFather is merciful. >> Judging Others >> 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D >> 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first takethe log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out thespeck that is in your brother's eye. >> Thanks! >> Dave Luciano >> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >> Chesterland, Ohio >> 44026 >> 216 406 5940 >> daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>> I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. >>> First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responsesof several members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I have in the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. >>> I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedback from the group at large. >>> At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to count him as a friend. >>> Peace, brothers. >>> Geordie >>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>>> My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - >>>> Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings up as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the >>>> From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, yourisk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. >>>> I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. >>>> My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. >>>> I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. >>>> OBC Rules! >>>> Mike >>>> Mike Glasser >>>> Owner >>>> The Goddard School in Sparks, MD >>>> 14630 York Road >>>> Sparks, MD 21152 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>> To: mark zentkovich >>>> Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings >>>> Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm >>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 >>>> Hello, >>>> I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. >>>> This is what I sent them if you care. >>>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) >>>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>>> Hello, >>>> I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. >>>> I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not goingto disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. >>>> Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guydid his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All our addresses are here. >>>> ----------------------------------------------------- >>>> After I got multiple responses, >>>> Thanks, >>>> To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up >>>> I feel for you guys in charge. >>>> We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. >>>> We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. >>>> We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender andmost important for the victims. >>>> Thanks for the information >>>> I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are goingto have another one soon. >>>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in our society. >>>> Thanks! >>>> Dave Luciano >>>> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >>>> Chesterland, Ohio >>>> 44026 >>>> 216 406 5940 >>>> daveluciano@me.com >>>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>>> [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] >>>> Amen, brother bob- >>>> My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. >>>> My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. >>>> My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. >>>> I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful >>>> These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well >>>> And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard >>>> Mark Zentkovich >>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >>>> From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM >>>> To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>>> Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>> Ken >>>> Thanks for the clarification. >>>> As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to methat they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. >>>> Thanks >>>> Bob >>>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM >>>> To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>> Taylor, >>>> At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member andask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... >>>> -------- >>>> It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most ofmy longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. >>>> That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. >>>> I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, weshould just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. >>>> I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to floodit telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimessketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, >>>> Ken M >>>> Sent from my not so smart phone. >>>> http://kenmorganti.weebly.com >>>> ------ Original message------ >>>> From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>> Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM >>>> To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; >>>> Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; >>>> Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>> I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired tomake a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. >>>> Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? WastheREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) >>>> OBC Inactive Membership Status >>>> A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agreeswill be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. >>>> Former Members >>>> Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the >>>> Regards, >>>> Taylor >>>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM >>>> To: Mac Wubben >>>> Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P >>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>> Let me approach this in a judicial manner. >>>> If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. >>>> If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after thefact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. >>>> As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. >>>> I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. Iknow some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? >>>> As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this memberbe a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. >>>> If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc.I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. >>>> However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. >>>> Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's notuse this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. >>>> There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forumis not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. >>>> If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 17:35:37 -0500 To: David Luciano Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: OBC Nick P No offense, that was not a shot at you. Kicked out was the wording in my initial Some are twisting my words as though I=E2=99m trying to have somebody expelled. I AM NOT. What=E2=99s done is done. The problem is the roc, not an individual. Not you. Nick Pelletier > On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:28 PM, David Luciano wrote: > Nick, > For the record if that "kicked out" was meant for my comment, > I said that because maybe this group wasn=E2=99t the right place to wear my religion on my sleeve, however I saw it as a opportunity to try to make this world a little better especially with some of the comments from fellow > If it wasn=E2=99t towards me. I apologize. > I shouldn=E2=99t even be in this mess=E2=A6 I don=E2=99t even know what ROC is. > Go Tribe=E2=A6oh ya maybe next year. > Enjoy the game tonight. > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:41 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> So I opened a can of worms and a lot of people are chiming in. Great! Fantstic! >> First thing I=E2=99ve got to jump on. A lot of people are using names.. I didn=E2=99t use any names. No names are needed. Names don=E2=99t matter. This is not about names. If you think this is about names, you missed the point. >> A lot of responses have me trying to kick somebody out. Where the hell did that come from? Did you miss my statement in the fourth to the last paragraph...=E2=9Dit=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for.=E2=9D If you think I=E2=99m trying to have somebody removed, you missed the point. >> The point is the rules of conduct. Any individual name is simply how the holes in the ROC were exposed. Not any individual. >> For example, what is =E2=9Cgood standing?=E2=9D If you don=E2=99t owe somebody a 1979 Larry Gura? Not slapping sense into somebody? Going to prison? Dry docking a deuce in a members throne? >> A very good question was asked in one of the many responses.....why is it easier for a registered sex offender to get into the group than a new guy? The new guy just sent cards out. The new guy just made trades. The newguy has a mentor. The new guy has a probation period. The registered sexoffender had a check in date to stay out of prison. Both are largely unknown either by being a new guy or by being away for however long. >> If that doesn=E2=99t make you wonder...... >> We are clearly not opposed to having group comments on new guys. More than half our inactives have been gone more than six years. Do we really know anything about them anymore....nope! Let=E2=99s do it for returning guys. Most we really need to reacquaint ourselves with anyway. >> If you wish to make this about any individual, that=E2=99s on you. You missed my point. >> If you wish to see the ROC for the Swiss cheese it is....there you go! That=E2=99s the point. >> ROC >> Nick Pelletier >> Nachobcards@yahoo.com >>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:18 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>> Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, >>> Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. >>> "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. >>> John Facenda, from NFL Films >>> One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. >>> 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler.Try turning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. >>> And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. >>> Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m trying. >>> Luke 6 >>> Love Your Enemies >>> 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[b]either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do notdemand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so tothem. >>> 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to thosewho do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. >>> Judging Others >>> 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and youwill not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D >>> 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Whydo you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. >>> Thanks! >>> Dave Luciano >>> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >>> Chesterland, Ohio >>> 44026 >>> 216 406 5940 >>> daveluciano@me.com >>>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>>> I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who havereplied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. >>>> First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responsesof several members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I have in the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. >>>> I said last night that there should have been more transparency to thegroup that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in themiddle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this wassurely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime andtrusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedback from the group at large. >>>> At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to count him as a friend. >>>> Peace, brothers. >>>> Geordie >>>>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>>>> My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - >>>>> Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings up as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the >>>>> From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you risk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. >>>>> I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. >>>>> My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. >>>>> I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. >>>>> OBC Rules! >>>>> Mike >>>>> Mike Glasser >>>>> Owner >>>>> The Goddard School in Sparks, MD >>>>> 14630 York Road >>>>> Sparks, MD 21152 >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>>> To: mark zentkovich >>>>> Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings >>>>> Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm >>>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 >>>>> Hello, >>>>> I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. >>>>> This is what I sent them if you care. >>>>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society.(and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) >>>>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>>>> Hello, >>>>> I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and Iwould like to know who and what. >>>>> I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. >>>>> Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All our addresses are here. >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------- >>>>> After I got multiple responses, >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up >>>>> I feel for you guys in charge. >>>>> We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. >>>>> We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. >>>>> We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and most important for the victims. >>>>> Thanks for the information >>>>> I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. >>>>> =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94= >>>>> What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in our society. >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> Dave Luciano >>>>> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >>>>> Chesterland, Ohio >>>>> 44026 >>>>> 216 406 5940 >>>>> daveluciano@me.com >>>>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>>>> [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] >>>>> Amen, brother bob- >>>>> My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. >>>>> My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. >>>>> My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. >>>>> I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful >>>>> These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well >>>>> And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard >>>>> Mark Zentkovich >>>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >>>>> From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM >>>>> To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>>>> Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>>> Ken >>>>> Thanks for the clarification. >>>>> As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Bob >>>>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM >>>>> To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>>> Taylor, >>>>> At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and notthe opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... >>>>> -------- >>>>> It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. >>>>> That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. >>>>> I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him inand force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feelwe put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and youget what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. >>>>> I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. TAYL, >>>>> Ken M >>>>> Sent from my not so smart phone. >>>>> http://kenmorganti.weebly.com >>>>> ------ Original message------ >>>>> From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>>>> Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM >>>>> To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; >>>>> Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; >>>>> Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>>> I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether theAC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. >>>>> Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) >>>>> OBC Inactive Membership Status >>>>> A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members toget confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they willbe removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. >>>>> Former Members >>>>> Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then beannounced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Taylor >>>>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM >>>>> To: Mac Wubben >>>>> Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P >>>>> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D >>>>> Let me approach this in a judicial manner. >>>>> If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, thatlaw can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed afterthat action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. >>>>> If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. >>>>> As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continueto judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. >>>>> I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent uponthemselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? >>>>> As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. >>>>> If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. >>>>> However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongsto each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to dealwith this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part ofa ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. >>>>> Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. >>>>> There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. >>>>> If you f ================= To: "'David Luciano'" , Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 18:54:06 -0400 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?RE:_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=E2=9CSpeak_softl?From: "Bob Donaldson" ROC Rules of Conduct From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 6:29 PM To: OBC Nick P Cc: Geordie Calvert ; OBC Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D For the record if that "kicked out" was meant for my comment, I said that because maybe this group wasn=E2=99t the right place to wear my religion on my sleeve, however I saw it as a opportunity to try to make this world a little better especially with some of the comments from fellow If it wasn=E2=99t towards me. I apologize. I shouldn=E2=99t even be in this mess=E2=A6 I don=E2=99t even knowwhat ROC is. Go Tribe=E2=A6oh ya maybe next year. Enjoy the game tonight. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 daveluciano@me.com On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:41 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: So I opened a can of worms and a lot of people are chiming in. Great! Fantstic! First thing I=E2=99ve got to jump on. A lot of people are using names. I didn=E2=99t use any names. No names are needed. Names don=E2=99tmatter. This is not about names. If you think this is about names, you missed the point. A lot of responses have me trying to kick somebody out. Where the hell didthat come from? Did you miss my statement in the fourth to the last paragraph...=E2=9Dit=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for.=E2=9D If you think I=E2=99m trying to have somebody removed, you missed the point. The point is the rules of conduct. Any individual name is simply how the holes in the ROC were exposed. Not any individual. For example, what is =E2=9Cgood standing?=E2=9D If you don=E2=99towe somebody a 1979 Larry Gura? Not slapping sense into somebody? Going to prison? Dry docking a deuce in a members throne? A very good question was asked in one of the many responses.....why is it easier for a registered sex offender to get into the group than a new guy? The new guy just sent cards out. The new guy just made trades. The new guy has a mentor. The new guy has a probation period. The registered sex offender had a check in date to stay out of prison. Both are largely unknowneither by being a new guy or by being away for however long. If that doesn=E2=99t make you wonder...... We are clearly not opposed to having group comments on new guys. More thanhalf our inactives have been gone more than six years. Do we really know anything about them anymore....nope! Let=E2=99s do it for returning guys. Most we really need to reacquaint ourselves with anyway. If you wish to make this about any individual, that=E2=99s on you. You missed my point. If you wish to see the ROC for the Swiss cheese it is....there you go! That=E2=99s the point. Nick Pelletier Nachobcards@yahoo.com On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:18 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. John Facenda, from NFL Films One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler. Tryturning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m Luke 6 Love Your Enemies 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[ b]either. 30Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goodsdo not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those whodo good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, forhe is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. Judging Others 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it willbe given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher,but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 daveluciano@me.com On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responses ofseveral members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I havein the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedbackfrom the group at large. At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to counthim as a friend. Peace, brothers. On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings upas I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the matter. From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be peoplewho don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you riskalienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that they know all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the abilityto edit who I deal with for whatever reason. I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversationabout issues like this. OBC Rules! Mike Glasser The Goddard School in Sparks, MD 14630 York Road Sparks, MD 21152 -----Original Message----- From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: mark zentkovich > Cc: Bob Donaldson >; Ken M >; obc-ramblings > Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. This is what I sent them if you care. What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I wouldlike to know who and what. I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going to disclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All ouraddresses are here. After I got multiple responses, To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. I feel for you guys in charge. We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and mostimportant for the victims. Thanks for the information I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going to have another one soon. What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in oursociety. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 daveluciano@me.com On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] Amen, brother bob- My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful consideration These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM To: 'Ken M'; Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Thanks for the clarification. As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me thatthey all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All hadthe best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision,maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [ mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. NowI'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those friendships is not something I take lightly. That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months towork out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address.I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standingby... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standing by. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to makea decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) OBC Inactive Membership Status A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees willbe documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. Former Members Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation,may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM To: Mac Wubben Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D Let me approach this in a judicial manner. If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is becauseit was not known that the action would be unlawful. If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the factis fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particularcase would be prior to it occurring. As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I knowsome who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be apart of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinionsto have a collective single view. If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act aroundthat individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. If you f ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 19:35:54 -0400 To: Bob Donaldson Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC-Ramblings=5D_=93Speak_softly_and_c?From: David Luciano Thanks Bob, Our kids are always texting us abbreviations that we don=E2=99t get. It=E2=99s Ha I should have figured this one out though. Thanks Nick, I am sorry the issue you brought up spiraled into something else (like grace etc.. which is good) but the real message you were getting at got masked. Keep a good thought. Best Regards! Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 25, 2017, at 6:54 PM, 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > ROC Rules of Conduct > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Lucianodaveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 6:29 PM > To: OBC Nick P > Cc: Geordie Calvert ; OBC > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Nick, > For the record if that "kicked out" was meant for my comment, > I said that because maybe this group wasn=E2=99t the right place to wear my religion on my sleeve, however I saw it as a opportunity to try to make this world a little better especially with some of the comments from fellow > If it wasn=E2=99t towards me. I apologize. > I shouldn=E2=99t even be in this mess=E2=A6 I don=E2=99t even know what ROC is. > Go Tribe=E2=A6oh ya maybe next year. > Enjoy the game tonight. > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 5:41 PM, OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > So I opened a can of worms and a lot of people are chiming in. Great! Fantstic! > First thing I=E2=99ve got to jump on. A lot of people are using names. I didn=E2=99t use any names. No names are needed. Names don=E2=99t matter. This is not about names. If you think this is about names, you missed the point. > A lot of responses have me trying to kick somebody out. Where the hell did that come from? Did you miss my statement in the fourth to the last paragraph...=E2=9Dit=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m looking for. It=E2=99s not expulsion I=E2=99m asking for.=E2=9D If you think I=E2=99m trying to have somebody removed, you missed the point. > The point is the rules of conduct. Any individual name is simply how theholes in the ROC were exposed. Not any individual. > For example, what is =E2=9Cgood standing?=E2=9D If you don=E2=99t owe somebody a 1979 Larry Gura? Not slapping sense into somebody? Going to prison? Dry docking a deuce in a members throne? > A very good question was asked in one of the many responses.....why is iteasier for a registered sex offender to get into the group than a new guy?The new guy just sent cards out. The new guy just made trades. The new guy has a mentor. The new guy has a probation period. The registered sex offender had a check in date to stay out of prison. Both are largely unknown either by being a new guy or by being away for however long. > If that doesn=E2=99t make you wonder...... > We are clearly not opposed to having group comments on new guys. More than half our inactives have been gone more than six years. Do we really know anything about them anymore....nope! Let=E2=99s do it for returning guys. Most we really need to reacquaint ourselves with anyway. > If you wish to make this about any individual, that=E2=99s on you. You missed my point. > If you wish to see the ROC for the Swiss cheese it is....there you go! That=E2=99s the point. > ROC > Nick Pelletier > Nachobcards@yahoo.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:18 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hope I don=E2=99t get kicked out, > Hey Geordie, I wonder who=E2=99s glass house is bigger, yours or mine?=E2=A6. At least were trying. > "Be a bigger man even when the other guy isn=E2=99t=E2=9D. > John Facenda, from NFL Films > One of my favorite quotes that I pounded my kids with. > 1 is playing collegiate ball as a catcher and the other was a wrestler. Try turning your cheek as a wrestler=E2=A6 Mega life lessons. > And Earl "EEK=E2=9D Kilbourn killed it with his comment, "Hate the sin, Love the sinner=E2=9D. > Something my wife preaches and I am not always on board with=E2=A6. but I=E2=99m trying. > Luke 6 > Love Your Enemies > 27 =E2=9CBut I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from onewho takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic[b]either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. > 32 =E2=9CIf you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what creditis that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. > Judging Others > 37 =E2=9CJudge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.=E2=9D > 39 He also told them a parable: =E2=9CCan a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, =E2Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,=E2=99 when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Geordie Calvert dodgergeo@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I appreciate the conversation and perspectives offered by all who have replied. A great many of them have served to give me pause for personal reflection. > First, I want to acknowledge that this decision was quite likely the toughest any AC has had to tackle. If I understand correctly, there was strong debate that took place over the course of what, three months or so? I=E2=99m sure the decision to readmit Doug was not taken lightly. And I certainly don=E2=99t mean to come across as judgmental. I happen to own a modestly sized glass house that is riddled with broken windows. The responses ofseveral members that spoke of forgiveness were well received here - I havein the past been much more forgiving than I am right now. I would do well to find that same capacity for forgiveness again. > I said last night that there should have been more transparency to the group that Doug had reapplied and that this request was under consideration. I stand behind that belief, but wanted to further explain - I was in the middle of watching the Dodgers last night and fired off a quick reply to Nick=E2=99s email. In hindsight, I probably should have gotten somewhere quiet and put my thoughts down in a less aggressive manner. Again, this was surely a very difficult thing to discuss and rule on. I=E2=99d be shocked if the AC didn=E2=99t reach out to a short list of other longtime and trusted OBCers to get their feelings. Saying that, in my opinion, given Doug=E2=99s unique circumstances, more should have been done to get feedbackfrom the group at large. > At the end of it, the AC=E2=99s decision was made, and Doug is one of us. We each have a choice in how to react to that fact. My choice is to remain - it=E2=99s still the same honor to be part of OBC that it has been for the past (almost) 21 years. Saying that, I appreciate Nick and his personal convictions. For those that know Nick, he=E2=99s a really good dude, a passionate collector and advocate for OBC, and I=E2=99m proud to count him as a friend. > Peace, brothers. > Geordie > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > My 2 cents as one of the relatively new guys - > Whatever anyone's personal feelings are, the issue here that Nick brings up as I read it is whether or not we as general members had a voice in the matter. > From my perspective, it feels like the AC did what they are supposed to do - make decisions. No matter what the decision, there will always be people who don't agree with the outcome. If you ask everyone for input, you risk alienating those who end up on the short end of the stick - especially when there is controversy. > I support the decision that the AC reached as I have to believe that theyknow all the details that I likely do not and I also respect each individual's decision to either interact or not with anyone else in OBC. > My endgame in OBC is to send and accumulate cards and I do have the ability to edit who I deal with for whatever reason. > I love that we are passionate enough to care and that there is conversation about issues like this. > OBC Rules! > Mike > Mike Glasser > Owner > The Goddard School in Sparks, MD > 14630 York Road > Sparks, MD 21152 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] > To: mark zentkovich > Cc: Bob Donaldson ; Ken M ; obc-ramblings > Sent: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 12:19 pm > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 > Hello, > I wrote to the guys that were responding because I am new and wanted to know what was going on. I know now. > This is what I sent them if you care. > What I am seeing is a lot of grace. Something missing in our society. (and I don=E2=99t mean Rose in the HOF) > =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= > Hello, > I know I am a new guy but I don=E2=99t know what is going on and I would like to know who and what. > I am only emailing the guys who responded because if you are not going todisclose to all I didn=E2=99t want to put more pressure on the group. > Is this something that puts our families in danger. I did read the guy did his time but I would like to know what, I - we are dealing with. All our addresses are here. > ----------------------------------------------------- > After I got multiple responses, > Thanks, > To the rest I do not need details. I just needed to know what we are up against. > I feel for you guys in charge. > We are a Christian family so let my hypocrocy show. > We need grace and forgivness , however not near my family. > We will pray for the ones in charge of the decisions, the offender and most important for the victims. > Thanks for the information > I have had great conversations with Mike R Wells. I think we are going tohave another one soon. > =E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2=94=E2= > What I am seeing is a lot of grace and forgivness. Something missing in our > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com > On Oct 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] > Amen, brother bob- > My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust the process=E2=99 of the AC. > My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. > My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. > I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after carefulconsideration > These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future direction as well > And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: 'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM > To: 'Ken M'; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Ken > Thanks for the clarification. > As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike aboutthis issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the otherOBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, but one that I believe was fair. > Thanks > Bob > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com[OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM > To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Taylor, > At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not theopinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... > -------- > It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of mylongest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or thosefriendships is not something I take lightly. > That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger thanit is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or nonsense. > I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him in andforce him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't have any inputis not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've turned out better? No. Ilost sleep trying to make the best decision. It didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now multiply that by ten and you getwhat I think would've happened if we let everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. > I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood ittelling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll be just me standingby. > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM > To: Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; > Cc: OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; > Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whetheror not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, thatany 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was notrequired to make a decision on their own. They could have requested input from the entiregroup in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't necessarily even apply here. > Appropriate questions (IMO). Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was theREQUEST announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) > OBC Inactive Membership Status > A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) years. A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to getconfirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. Afterthe contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,otherwise they will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the membership application to rejoin OBC. The date upon which the Inactive member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to the OBCAC. > Former Members > Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory committee his desire to be returned to active membership.The request will then be announced to the general membership and considered at the next meeting of the committee. > Regards, > Taylor > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > on behalf of JAY TYSVER JTysver1@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM > To: Mac Wubben > Cc: OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that lawcan and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member bea part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I allow othersto influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum isnot the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you f ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" , Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:16:44 -0400 Subject: IF From: ED SCHOTT Vin Scully just didnt make you laugh or cry or give you chills youre not a real baseball fan That was the best 1st pitch I have ever seen Loved it VIN ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:52:14 -0400 To: wayne.m.delia@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Can you give us an update? As my lists are on the OBC site, I have held off from making any changes. I have recently received a few packages and would like to update the lists. Thank you for all your efforts to keep our site functioning. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC Ramblings Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 11:37 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another web hosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a non-executive "executive decision" to start that process. Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions about anhour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their servers, and thisquery usually runs in much less than one second). Also, we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without any access to theweb site or the database. There would be no way to test out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install. This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from theweb site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set tomigrate to another web hosting service provider. Here's what I want everybody to do: 1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on oldbaseball.com, you can update it as usual. 2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com, please don't attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another service provider. 3) If and when the website and database become available again, please don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, email, phone, etc. 4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows of a cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or Joe Isaac know of your recommendations. 5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting service. Sorry about the disruption... Virus-free. www.avast.com=09=09 ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 23:53:38 -0400 To: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: Wayne Delia Fair enough... I had asked for an explanation note from the Network Solutions project supervisor with details of what went wrong with our website, and what can we do to get automatically fast-tracked the next time it happens, and all I got was this: Dear Wayne Delia, I do apologize for the issues. I can confirm for you that the DB has been created. If you have any other questions please visit our comprehensive support section at https://knowledge.web.com/ or contact our Support Center and refer to ticket 14033294 and a specialist will be happy to further assist you and ensure that we completely resolve your issue as quickly as If you have any questions regarding this Service Request, you can chat directly with our Technical Support team by clicking on the following link: http://ts.chatwithsupport.net Thank You, Technical Services Network Solutions, a Web.com Company This is unacceptable. 1) The DB is named obc, not obcadministrator. The access account is named obcadministrator. 2) The database simply had to be reactivated, and not created from scratch. 3) Obviously, no details of the problem were received, and we're most likely not going to get them. I was going to follow up on the chat link but they're pretty much useless in getting any information other than "We're working on it" and "Your website is back up." So, I've been researching better platforms for our domain name oldbaseball.com. The winning candidate appears to be HostGator, Compared to our current web hosting package on Network Solutions (NS), HostGator (HG) has a lot of big advantages, as follows: Cost per month: NS $10/month; HG $2.65/month for 3 years, then $6.95/month beginning in 2010. Disk space: NS 300GB; HG unlimited. (This is not a mistake.) Bandwidth: NS 5GB transfer per month; HG unlimited data transfer. Databases: NS 3 MySQL databases; HG unlimited MySQL databases. Emails: NS 1000 email accounts; HG unlimited email accounts. Secure FTP data file transfers: both provide this. Malware: NS "malware scanning", HG automatic malware removal. Subdomains: NS 3 subdomains; HG unlimited subdomains. (We could define something like uv.oldbaseball.com, nonsports.oldbaseball.com, etc. in the I strongly recommend (and have already included) SiteLock for hack-attack protection at a buck-fifty per month, and an automated website backup for all web files and databases at two bucks a month. With these add-on packages, and a big discount for an introductory three-year hosting plan, I paid $138.74 - for three full years of coverage. Boom. Network Solutions is charging us about that much for only one year, with less resources, crappy tech support, and they're having trouble running simple MySQL queries or keeping our website up without random outages lasting a day or two. HostGator is the highest rated web hosting provider as reviewed by PC Magazine; Network Solutions is toast. So, we've got unlimited file space and unlimited databases, ready to go. I need to figure out the procedure to transfer the domain name registration of oldbaseball.com from Network Solutions to HostGator, which shouldn't take more than a couple of days. In the meantime, this is very important: If you make any changes at all on the website, SAVE YOUR WORK. Make a copy of your wantlist if it's stored on the OBC web server, Also, if at all possible, please hold off on making any database changes to your mailing address, email, phone, etc.; if you must make changes, keep track of what you changed as you may need to re-do the change on the database when we get up and running on HostGator. I'm going to try to keep the outage as short as possible but we may lose a bit of time as we transition to the new platform. Also, I will send copies of the new platform hosting agreement to Joe Isaac, and I could use some volunteers for beta testing later on toward the weekend once we get everything to the new location. Feel free to contact me directly with any questions. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 8:52 PM, wrote: > Wayne, > Can you give us an update? As my lists are on the OBC site, I have held > off from making any changes. I have recently received a few packages and > would like to update the lists. > Thank you for all your efforts to keep our site functioning. > Mike Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> > To: OBC Ramblings > Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 11:37 pm > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider > I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another web > hosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a > non-executive "executive decision" to start that process. > Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first > noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions > about an hour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and > "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert > email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem > (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their > servers, and this query usually runs in much less than one second). Also, > we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without > any access to the web site or the database. There would be no way to test > out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still > apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on > their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install. > This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from > the web site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the > data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set > to migrate to another web hosting service provider. > *Here's what I want everybody to do: * > 1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on > oldbaseball.com, you can update it as usual. > 2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com, please don't > attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you > need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it > may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another > service provider. > 3) If and when the website and database become available again, please > don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, > email, phone, etc. > 4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we > migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows ofa > cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or Joe > Isaac know of your recommendations. > 5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave > it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting > service. > Sorry about the disruption... > Best, > WMD > > www.avast.com > > <#m_2629060069699963878_aolmail_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> ================= Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:19:32 -0400 To: mark zentkovich Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_=5BOBC=2DRamblings=5D_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_big_?From: Joel Freedman OBC rules at the time were simple, send and email and you are back to active. The AC struggled with this. We all knew we had to do something. As a member of the AC, I will weigh in with my thought and my approach to this issue. Thus, transparency. There is a public process for allowing sex offenders back into society. It is to notify the people in the neighborhood of their whereabouts. They are given a second chance to be part of society, but with some safeguards in place. I wanted the same for members of OBC. We created a "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" category on the external directory page. We identified internally on the members page, RSO. Via email we sent out Doug's letter. Then we tightened the returning member rules. Seven months later, we continue to discuss this topic, with potentially elimination of the inactive list and having all reapply. But as we look at this, it does not go far enough. An RSO or felon could still be let in to the club or be among us. Do we really want to perform background checks on ourselves and our members at some frequency? Even background checks have their issues. Who decides who is let in and if there is a felon among us, who decides they should be forced out? So one can see these topics are not simple and there are holes in our rules. There are holes and law changes in society. My lone comment on "the membership should decide" is...... The eight AC members were elected by the membership to make decisions for the group. We applied the knowledge and experience each has gained in their lives to deal with this issue. Unfortunately there are no guidelines for what should be brought to the membership, thus we believe we chose the best course of action for OBC. Joel Freedman OBC - 2004 On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:33 AM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) <#m_-3025810512933890741_TopText> from mark zentkovich > included below] > Amen, brother bob- > My first reaction when this surfaced in the summer was that I =E2trust > process=E2=99 of the AC. > My first reaction when seeing nick=E2=99s note last night was the same. > My reaction after reading the feedback this morning is still the same. > I believe and trust that the AC did the best possible thing after careful > consideration > These AC members are our OBC brothers also, and I trust in their future > direction as well > And just like brothers, we can stand up and speak, even fight a > little=E2=A6then get back to playing with our cardboard > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for > Windows 10 > *From: *'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > > *Sent: *Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:17 AM > *To: *'Ken M' ; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > *Subject: *RE: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Ken > Thanks for the clarification. > As a side note, I had a talk with OBCAC members Ken, Joel and Spike about > this issue at a card show over the summer. It was quite apparent to me > that they all were giving this considerable thought and consideration. All > had the best interests of OBC in mind, as I=E2=99m sure did all the other > OBCAC. What I heard that day made me think I would vote for these guys > again, not because I agreed 100% with everything that they said but because > they all had the best interests of the group at heart and the final > decision, maybe not perfect, and not one everyone would 100% agree with, > but one that I believe was fair. > Thanks > Bob > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups..com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@ > yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 25, 2017 10:16 AM > *To:* obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Taylor, > At the time, an inactive member could simply email an AC member and ask > to be returned to active status. No discussion.. No vote. Welcome back. Now > I'm gonna take off my AC hat. The following is from me alone and not the > opinions expressed or implied of any other AC member... > -------- > It is impossible for me to care about this group. It has been a part of me > since my (very) late 20's and I'm now in my (very) early 50's. Most of my > longest running friendships come from this group. A threat to OBC or those > friendships is not something I take lightly. > That being said, I'm not about to make this group something bigger than > it is. My job is to make sure there's ice cream and frozen veggies on the > shelf, not set everyone's moral compass. Over 99.99% of society could care > less what we do here and I dare say most would find it silly and/or > nonsense. > I didn't wake up and say, "Oh Doug has internet and email access, we > should just let him right back in tomorrow." This decision took three > months to work out. It was never some kind of grand scheme to back door him > in and force him on you without any input. It is true that 1/3 of the > membership wasn't around when he went inactive. To say that they didn't > have any input is not. There were elected memb ers of the AC who fit that > category. They expressed their concerns and that's why I think we got it > right. I feel we put measures in place for everyone's benefit. Could we > have gone about it another way? Absolutely. Do I think things would've > turned out better? No. I lost sleep trying to make the best decision. It > didn't help that several of my friends were in heated arguments. Now > multiply that by ten and you get what I think would've happened if we let > everyone else weigh in on a decision we were elected to come up with. > I'm off today and I've just cleaned out my inbox. Feel free to flood it > telling me how I screwed up... or with any other topics you want to > address. I can take your concerns via text, but this crappy phone is > sometimes sketchy about delivering them to me in a timely fashion. > Operators are standing by... Well, this is a low budget operation, so it'll > be just me standing by. TAYL, > Ken M > *Sent from my not so smart phone.* > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > *From: *Taylor Schock taylor_s chock@hotmail.com > <%20taylor_schock@hotmail.com> [OBC-Ramblings] > *Date: *Wed, Oct 25, 2017 9:06 AM > *To: *Mac Wubben;JAY TYSVER; > *Cc: *OBC Ramblings;OBC Nick P; > *Subject:*Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > I would question ( and maybe that's part of Nick's point) whether the AC > may not have even followed the rules (To be fair, I do not remember whether > or not the person had gone through a reapplication process, or if so, > that any 'special circumstances' were noted). Also the AC was not*required > *to make a decision on their own. They *could *have requested input from > the entire group in the application process. So 'ex post facto' doesn't > necessarily even apply here. > *Appropriate questions (IMO)*. Was the person required to 'reapply'? Was > the*REQUEST *announced to the general membership? Or was it a simple > "welcome back" announcement? (again, I don't remember) > *OBC Inactive Membership Status* > *A time limitation on Inactive membership status will be set to three (3) > years.* A person assigned by the AC will contact all Inactive members to > get confirmation from each Inactive member to stay on the Inactive list. > After the contact has been made, each Inactive member will need to respond > within three (3) years to remain on the Inactive listing,*otherwise they > will be removed from the directory and would need to reapply using the > membership application to rejoin OBC*. The date upon which the Inactive > member agrees will be documented on the directory listing or provided to > the OBCAC. > *Former Members* > Any former member, who was in good standing at the time of his > resignation, may reapply for membership by simply emailing to the advisory > committee his desire to be returned to active membership.*The request > will then be announced to the general membership* and considered at the > next meeting of the committee. > Regards, > Taylor > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com <%20OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com> > > on behalf of JAY TYSVER <%3cOBC-%20Ramblings@yahoogroups.com> > JTysver1@msn.com <%20JTysver1@msn.com> [OBC-Ramblings] > > <%3cOBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 25, 2017 1:59 AM > *To:* Mac Wubben > *Cc:* OBC Ramblings; OBC Nick P > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =E2=9CSpeak softly and carry a big stick=E2=9D > Let me approach this in a judicial manner. > If there were to be a law passed prior to some action occurring, that law > can and should be enforced. Howe ver, if there were a law passed after that > action occurred, that law cannot be applied after the fact. That is because > it was not known that the action would be unlawful. > If the rules were to allow former members upon re-admission of an > application via a vote of the ac, I'm not sure the ac changing a rule after > the fact is fair to any applicants. The time to change it, to effect the > particular case would be prior to it occurring. > As for this particular case, my understanding is the person had to fully > explain their actions to all members so we were all aware of the case and > could make and exercise our own judgments about the individual. This person > served a real and full sentence by the law. Anyone can wish to continue to > judge or punish this individual, that is their choice. > I, for one, feel a sentence served should have meaning. I know individuals > who are better people for serving sentences for some serious crimes. I know > some who are worse. Each individual who serves has it incumbent upon > themselves to learn from their mistakes. Without that, why incarcerate > anyone for their crimes? Why not just kill them all? > As for whether this group has remained complicit in having this member be > a part of OBC, my understanding is the spirit of OBC comes from the > individuals in the group, not the collective. There are too many divergent > opinions to have a collective single view. > If this person has changed any persons or done any actions at this time > which require his expulsion, I see no reason why the ac shouldn't act > accordingly. However, if this person has acted according to the di ctates > of the rules of the ac, Each individual can make their judgment on how to > act around that individual.. Don't send him cards, return what he sends you > etc. I think this person will understand your feelings by your actions. > However, and I state this with my full conviction, a decision belongs to > each individual on how to treat others. I appreciate each person's > divergent views on this matter. I, for one, feel it is important for me to > deal with this in a personal manner. In other words, I don't wish to be > part of a ganging up against any persons or group. I will make my decisions > as I see they are fit, and they won't be influenced by others nor will I > allow others to influence me. Inform me, yes, but the choice belongs to me. > Feel free to discuss amongst yourselves your views on this person. Let's > not use this group to destroy itself or any other individuals. Let's not > use this group to attack others. In the same vein, attacking the ac on this > forum makes no sense either. > There is a mechanism for dealing with the ac. It's called a vote. If you > wish to campaign for or against any members, do it privately. This forum is > not the right place to do it. It amounts to solicitation. > If you f ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 05:49:41 -0400 To: Geno Wagner Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: chris tripler I agree on the Wayne and Joe deserving our hugest thanks...the politics jab....I go to OBC precisely to get away from that crap... Thanks again, Wayne and Joe!!! Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 26, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Geno Wagner illini_grad_90@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Does this have anything to do with that World Wide Web, information superhighway thing? I've heard about that. > Thank God for Wayne and Joe...and of course, Al Gore. > Take Care, > Geno > From: "Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" > To: mikesportsfan@aol.com > Cc: OBC Ramblings > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 9:53 PM > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider > Fair enough... I had asked for an explanation note from the Network Solutions project supervisor with details of what went wrong with our website, and what can we do to get automatically fast-tracked the next time it happens, and all I got was this: > Dear Wayne Delia, > I do apologize for the issues. I can confirm for you that the DB obcadministrator has been created. > If you have any other questions please visit our comprehensive support section at https://knowledge.web.com/ or contact our Support Center and refer to ticket 14033294 and a specialist will be happy to further assist you and ensure that we completely resolve your issue as quickly as possible. > If you have any questions regarding this Service Request, you can chat directly with our Technical Support team by clicking on the following link: > http://ts.chatwithsupport.net > Thank You, > Technical Services > Network Solutions, a Web.com Company > This is unacceptable. 1) The DB is named obc, not obcadministrator. The access account is named obcadministrator. 2) The database simply had to be reactivated, and not created from scratch. 3) Obviously, no details of the problem were received, and we're most likely not going to get them. I was going to follow up on the chat link but they're pretty much useless in getting any information other than "We're working on it" and "Your website is back > So, I've been researching better platforms for our domain name oldbaseball..com. The winning candidate appears to be HostGator, Compared to our current web hosting package on Network Solutions (NS), HostGator (HG) has a lotof big advantages, as follows: > Cost per month: NS $10/month; HG $2.65/month for 3 years, then $6.95/month beginning in 2010. > Disk space: NS 300GB; HG unlimited. (This is not a mistake.) > Bandwidth: NS 5GB transfer per month; HG unlimited data transfer. > Databases: NS 3 MySQL databases; HG unlimited MySQL databases. > Emails: NS 1000 email accounts; HG unlimited email accounts. > Secure FTP data file transfers: both provide this. > Malware: NS "malware scanning", HG automatic malware removal. > Subdomains: NS 3 subdomains; HG unlimited subdomains. (We could define something like uv.oldbaseball.com, nonsports.oldbaseball.com, etc. in the future) > I strongly recommend (and have already included) SiteLock for hack-attackprotection at a buck-fifty per month, and an automated website backup for all web files and databases at two bucks a month. With these add-on packages, and a big discount for an introductory three-year hosting plan, I paid $138.74 - for three full years of coverage. Boom. Network Solutions is charging us about that much for only one year, with less resources, crappy tech support, and they're having trouble running simple MySQL queries or keepingour website up without random outages lasting a day or two. HostGator is the highest rated web hosting provider as reviewed by PC Magazine; Network Solutions is toast. > So, we've got unlimited file space and unlimited databases, ready to go. I need to figure out the procedure to transfer the domain name registrationof oldbaseball.com from Network Solutions to HostGator, which shouldn't take more than a couple of days. > In the meantime, this is very important: > If you make any changes at all on the website, SAVE YOUR WORK. Make a copy of your wantlist if it's stored on the OBC web server, Also, if at all possible, please hold off on making any database changes to your mailing address, email, phone, etc.; if you must make changes, keep track of what you changed as you may need to re-do the change on the database when we get up and running on HostGator. I'm going to try to keep the outage as short as possible but we may lose a bit of time as we transition to the new platform. Also, I will send copies of the new platform hosting agreement to Joe Isaac, and I could use some volunteers for beta testing later on toward the weekend once we get everything to the new location. > Best, > WMD > Feel free to contact me directly with any questions. > Best, > WMD > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 8:52 PM, wrote: > Wayne, > Can you give us an update? As my lists are on the OBC site, I have held off from making any changes. I have recently received a few packages andwould like to update the lists. > Thank you for all your efforts to keep our site functioning. > Mike Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC Ramblings > Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 11:37 pm > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider > I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another webhosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a non-executive "executive decision" to start that process. > Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions about an hour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their servers, and this query usually runs in much less than one second). Also, we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without any access to the web site or the database. There would be no way to test out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install. > This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from the web site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set to migrate to another web hosting service provider. > Here's what I want everybody to do: > 1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on oldbaseball.com, you can update it as usual. > 2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com, please don't attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another service provider. > 3) If and when the website and database become available again, please don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, email, phone, etc. > 4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows of a cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or JoeIsaac know of your recommendations. > 5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting service. > Sorry about the disruption... > Best, > WMD > Virus-free. www.avast.com ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 06:34:13 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider From: Ken M    What Wayne didn't mention in all that techno gobbledygook (and what I found on the Hostgator website) is that they guarantee 99.9% uptime (less than nine hours per year), 24/7/365 tech support and a site migration team ready to help transfer everything for new accounts. Bottom line: Even after our introductory rate which won't expire for three years), we are paying pretty much the same amount for a MUCH better website host.   This is a grand slam home run by Wayne. I'm going to make sure one of his first orders of business after the site transfer will be to edit his wantlist and cross off the cards I send him. Thanks Wayne! Ken M - can I call dibs on a kenm@oldbaseball.com email address now? Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Wed, Oct 25, 2017 11:53 PMTo: mikesportsfan@aol.com;Cc: OBC Ramblings;Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider Fair enough... I had asked for an explanation note from the Network Solutions project supervisor with details of what went wrong with our website, and what can we do to get automatically fast-tracked the next time it happens, and all I got was this:  =================================================Dear Wayne Delia, I do apologize for the issues. I can confirm for you that the DB obcadministrator has been created. If you have any other questions please visit our comprehensive support section at https://knowledge.web.com/ or contact our Support Center and refer to ticket 14033294 and a specialist will be happy to further assist you and ensure that we completely resolve your issue as quickly as possible. If you have any questions regarding this Service Request, you can chat directly with our Technical Support team by clicking on the following link: http://ts.chatwithsupport.net Thank You, Technical Services Network Solutions, a Web.com Company ================================================= This is unacceptable. 1) The DB is named obc, not obcadministrator. The access account is named obcadministrator. 2) The database simply had to be reactivated, and not created from scratch. 3) Obviously, no details of the problem were received, and we're most likely not going to get them. I was going to follow up on the chat link but they're pretty much useless in getting any information other than "We're working on it" and "Your website is back up."  So, I've been researching better platforms for our domain name oldbaseball.com. The winning candidate appears to be HostGator, Compared to our current web hosting package on Network Solutions (NS), HostGator (HG) has a lot of big advantages, as follows:  Cost per month: NS $10/month; HG $2.65/month for 3 years, then $6.95/month beginning in 2010.Disk space: NS 300GB; HG unlimited. (This is not a mistake.) Bandwidth: NS 5GB transfer per month; HG unlimited data transfer.Databases: NS 3 MySQL databases; HG unlimited MySQL databases. Emails: NS 1000 email accounts; HG unlimited email accounts.Secure FTP data file transfers: both provide this. Malware: NS "malware scanning", HG automatic malware removal. Subdomains: NS 3 subdomains; HG unlimited subdomains. (We could define something like uv.oldbaseball.com, nonsports.oldbaseball.com, etc. in the future) I strongly recommend (and have already included) SiteLock for hack-attack protection at a buck-fifty per month, and an automated website backup for all web files and databases at two bucks a month. With these add-on packages, and a big discount for an introductory three-year hosting plan, I paid $138.74 - for three full years of coverage. Boom. Network Solutions is charging us about that much for only one year, with less resources, crappy tech support, and they're having trouble running simple MySQL queries or keeping our website up without random outages lasting a day or two. HostGator is the highest rated web hosting provider as reviewed by PC Magazine; Network Solutions is toast.  So, we've got unlimited file space and unlimited databases, ready to go. I need to figure out the procedure to transfer the domain name registration of oldbaseball.com from Network Solutions to HostGator, which shouldn't take more than a couple of days.  In the meantime, this is very important:  If you make any changes at all on the website, SAVE YOUR WORK. Make a copy of your wantlist if it's stored on the OBC web server, Also, if at all possible, please hold off on making any database changes to your mailing address, email, phone, etc.; if you must make changes, keep track of what you changed as you may need to re-do the change on the database when we get up and running on HostGator. I'm going to try to keep the outage as short as possible but we may lose a bit of time as we transition to the new platform. Also, I will send copies of the new platform hosting agreement to Joe Isaac, and I could use some volunteers for beta testing later on toward the weekend once we get everything to the new location.  Feel free to contact me directly with any questions. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 8:52 PM, wrote: Wayne,  Can you give us an update?  As my lists are on the OBC site, I have held off from making any changes.  I have recently received a few packages and would like to update the lists.  Thank you for all your efforts to keep our site functioning.Mike Rich  -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC Ramblings Sent: Sat, Oct 21, 2017 11:37 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Web Site Down - We need a new service provider   I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC with approval to move to another web hosting service provider, but I think I'm going to have to make a non-executive "executive decision" to start that process.  Our website has been down now for 25 hours (since Joel Freedman first noticed it yesterday). I opened a problem ticket with Network Solutions about an hour after Joel contacted me. It was escalated 21 hours ago, and "fast-tracked" 17 hours ago. I finally got the automated suspension alert email 8 hours ago, which as usual is late, and mis-identifies the problem (apparently, we have a "long-running query" that is clobbering their servers, and this query usually runs in much less than one second). Also, we are asked to figure out what the problem is, and fix the query - without any access to the web site or the database. There would be no way to test out any kind of blind fix like this. As of 10AM today, we're still apparently lost in the queue with no estimated restore time. The fix on their end usually takes between five to ten minutes to install.  This, pardon my French, sucks. What I've done is copied every file from the web site, and am waiting for database access so I can export all of the data off the database into a flat file. Theoretically, we would be all set to migrate to another web hosting service provider.  Here's what I want everybody to do:  1) If you've got your want list hosted somewhere else other than on oldbaseball.com, you can update it as usual.  2) If you've got your want list stored on oldbaseball.com, please don't attempt to make any changes to the want list file for a few days. If you need a copy of your latest want list file, I can get that to you, but it may be delayed as I'll be very busy migrating our web site to another service provider.  3) If and when the website and database become available again, please don't make any changes or updates to any of your collecting goals, address, email, phone, etc.  4) As best as possible, please bear with me for the next few days as we migrate to a more reliable web hosting platform. Also, if anyone knows of a cost-effective, reliable web hosting service provider, please let me or Joe Isaac know of your recommendations.  5) If and when the website and database become available again, I'll leave it in "read only" mode until we're ready to switch over to a new hosting service.  Sorry about the disruption... Virus-free. www.avast.com ================= To: OBC Ramblings Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 13:47:45 +0000 Subject: HOCKTOBER returns! From: Aaron Shirley I've reactivated the HOCKTOBER spreadsheet; you may edit it to reflect whatyou've received or what you're sending. Thanks for your patience - I had acouple of very strange days here and it slipped my mind. Link is below foryour https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AEVu9eRjF_zWRFTdhfrbeIIxP-YIhZ114hRzTmR4Y90/edit?uspsharing [https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/mK-JisoZM-DqGW0jiYnTxcRg563Qmz4An-IlX1H4LCYqHZIj_sfedcmIcSP-ZvbVAHeutgw1200-h630-p] VINTAGE HOCKEY COLLECTOR, SET YEAR& NAME, HOCKEY WANTLISTS!, LAST UPDATED TJ Valacak, 1933-34 Canadian Gum, Need Gardiner, as well as upgrades to all others, 10/ 4 TJ Valacak, 1933-34 V129, 50, 10/ 4 TJ Valacak, 1934-35 SweetCaporal, Need all Blackhawks, 10/ 4 TJ Valacak, 1934-43 Beehive H... ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 11:35:48 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtPQkMtUmFtYmxpbmdzXSDigJxTcGVhayBzb2Z0bHkgYW5kIGNhcnJ5IGEgYmlnIA==?From: Wayne Delia Fellas, I'm just the webmaster. I twiddle the bits when the OBC/AC tells me A couple months ago, I seem to remember getting a request from the OBC/AC to update the Rules of Conduct (ROC) which, as an officer in several other community boards of trustees, I feel are somewhat incomplete. We now have a new membership category, "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" (I think it's now just "Member Emeritus"), which is not yet defined in the ROC. I haven't made the changes yet, because I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC to a request I made for confirmation. With the way my memory has failed me lately, I may not have actually sent that request for confirmation out, such is life as a sexagenarian. (I like that title.) If anyone has the requested change text, please forward it to me, as I seem to have misplaced or mis-remembered it. If you want to have a segregated class of membership distinct from "Current Member", "New Member," "Former Member," or "Inactive Member," you're going to have to update it in the ROC defining exactly what "Member Emeritus" means and how someone comes to be designated with that status. The requested change made explicit reference to the problem of being a registered sex offender. Now the Rules of Conduct are essentially our By-Laws, which are (and should be) public. It may even be a requirement of a New Member to read and understand the ROC. But if I'm just a regular guy (assume for the moment I am) who wants to join OBC and trade beat-up old cards, and I read the soon-to-be-updated ROC, and I see that registered sex offenders get thrown into a category called "Member Emeritus," and I see in the public directory that there's at least one entry in that category, I'm going to wonder about that. Or not - maybe I'll just check the box that says I've read the Rules of Conduct, figure I'll behave myself, then get approved as a New Member, find my entry in the members-only private Directory page, and see that somebody in there is listed as a registered sex offender. Hmmm. So, for that reason, we need to update the ROC with some very carefully-worded clarification of this "Member Emeritus" category, not specifically mentioning anything about specific crimes, just as a catch-all category of ... well, whatever it means, in general terms. I'm thinking about something like "Member Emeritus is a category of membership for those otherwise active members who have experienced life events making regular membership unsuitable or not applicable," or other similar vague wordings open to interpretation. Some here have expressed concern that agencies (employers, police, lawyers, etc) may possibly associate them with a registered sex offender, which could be career-threatening for those in educational or religious administration professions. While I see the chances of that as remote, it remains a non-zero possibility by the following process: ROC is public --> ROC defines "Member Emeritus" as a segregated category for convicted felons --> Public Directory includes one or more entries in the "Member Emeritus" category --> bad things happen to reputations, lawsuits, and/or employment I will now return to looking into moving the OBC website to a new web hosting provider. ================= Date: 26 Oct 2017 16:45:56 +0000 To: Subject: Joe's Museum From: tvalacak@comcast.net ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 13:12:33 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: OBC website down for a while... perfectly normal... awaiting transfer From: Wayne Delia The OBC website will be down for a while during the transfer from Network Solutions to HostGator. NS is being a pain (as usual) by delaying the delivery of the authorization code to me by 24-48 hours, but it's a necessary step to prevent someone else from maliciously taking down our As soon as the website becomes available, I'll restore all the files and If your want list is stored on the OBC website, and you need a copy of it, just let me know and I'll send you a copy of it in an email. If you absolutely, positively have to make a change to a web-hosted want list or a database entry... keep ya shirt on. It'll just be a day or two. ================= To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:05:37 +0000 Subject: set completion From: Mac Wubben Stuck a fork in the 59 fleers today. Wonder what card was last...wish i liked reprints. Anyway...happy to be done. Thanks to everyone who helped out along the way. ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 15:07:19 -0400 To: Mac Wubben Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion From: Joel Freedman On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Stuck a fork in the 59 fleers today. Wonder what card was last...wish i > liked reprints. Anyway...happy to be done. Thanks to everyone who helped > out along the way. > Mac ================= To: Joel Freedman Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:10:36 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion From: Mac Wubben Yes, dastardly #68 From: Joel Freedman Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 3:07:19 PM To: Mac Wubben Cc: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Stuck a fork in the 59 fleers today. Wonder what card was last...wish i liked reprints. Anyway...happy to be done. Thanks to everyone who helped out along the way. ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:26:16 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: help please IDing a card From: biggies@aol.com I came across a card I can't ID. Its a Carl Hubble card, about the size and shape of a Goudey but more rectangular, Red background, His name position and team at bottom and a circle top right that says, BIG LEAGUE GUM. Thanks for any help, it also looks like a cutout card but not like any Wheaties I have seen. ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:29:28 -0400 To: obcbobd@gmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] help please IDing a card From: biggies@aol.com K, I feel stupid. But thanks Bob! -----Original Message----- From: Bob Donaldson To: biggies ; obc-ramblings Sent: Thu, Oct 26, 2017 5:27 pm Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] help please IDing a card Sounds like a 1941 Goudey From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 5:26 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help please IDing a card I came across a card I can't ID. Its a Carl Hubble card, about the size andshape of a Goudey but more rectangular, Red background, His name position and team at bottom and a circle top right that says, BIG LEAGUE GUM. Thanks for any help, it also looks like a cutout card but not like any Wheaties I have seen. ================= To: , Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:27:39 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] help please IDing a card From: "Bob Donaldson" Sounds like a 1941 Goudey From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 5:26 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help please IDing a card I came across a card I can't ID. Its a Carl Hubble card, about the size andshape of a Goudey but more rectangular, Red background, His name position and team at bottom and a circle top right that says, BIG LEAGUE GUM. Thanks for any help, it also looks like a cutout card but not like any Wheaties I have seen. ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 20:51:45 -0400 To: obcmac@hotmail.com, jefreedman1@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I would venture to guess that more of us are down to card #68 than have #68. Congratulations for getting one of the tougher postwar cards to a relatively mainstream set. Another set well done! Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: Joel Freedman Cc: obc-ramblings Sent: Thu, Oct 26, 2017 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion Yes, dastardly #68 From: Joel Freedman Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 3:07:19 PM To: Mac Wubben Cc: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] set completion On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Mac Wubben obcmac@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: Stuck a fork in the 59 fleers today. Wonder what card was last...wish i liked reprints. Anyway...happy to be done. Thanks to everyone who helped out along the way. ================= Date: 27 Oct 2017 01:14:39 +0000 To: Subject: Recent big SCD question From: mikesportsfan@aol.com ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 23:35:52 -0400 To: Wayne Delia Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFtPQkMtUmFtYmxpbmdzXSDigJxTcGVhayBzb2Z0bHkgYW5kIGNhcnJ5IGEgYmlnIA==?From: Andy Huntoon Hello OBC, I feel that as a member of this wonderful group, who cares about it quite a bit, I have an obligation to share my thoughts on this issue. I didn't chime in right away because I'm uncomfortable with the whole thing. I don't know how I feel about certain things. I've reread Nick's initial post a few times throughout the entire discussion and understand that Nick's goal is to strengthen the ROC and allow more transparency with regards to the AC. Not to get anyone kicked out of the group, or to slander anyone. He stated his position on Doug's reinstatement as well. This caused quite a few responses which also commented on how folks felt about Doug's reinstatement. In regards to Nick's position on strengthening the ROC and allowing for more transparency, I agree with him. It's really that simple, I agree with you Nick. In regards to Doug's reinstatement...well, this is where I feel confused internally. When I first read the email explaining his return and his history I was shocked. I felt scared that we were all suddenly associated with a RSO. And none of us outside of the AC had a choice in the matter. There is a pretty big friggin' stigma attached to this particular criminal past to be painfully honest. I, like many of those who responded already, like to forgive people, especially if they have paid their debt to society. But I also don't particularly feel good about a member of my favorite group of people having ***Registered Sex Offender*** listed under his name in our directory. How do we ease new members into this situation going forward? Does Tom (the new member guy) have to mention it to a new member when they get in or do we just let them happen across it one day when they are looking at the addresses and have them stop in their tracks and think, "What the f**k?!" I don't know Doug. He might be a great person that made a mistake. I'm not trying to pick on him here either. But this is the conversation that we are all having right now. I'm still torn on how I feel about the whole thing. I don't have a solution to offer right now either. I wish I did, but I don't. Nick, I hope you stay in OBC as I really like you and think you're an asset to the group. I'm happy to be a part of a group where we can have this conversation and all still be friends. I'm going to stop here and continue to read other's responses and try to figure out my feelings on this In the end, OBC Rules!!! Andy Huntoon On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Fellas, I'm just the webmaster. I twiddle the bits when the OBC/AC tells > me to. > A couple months ago, I seem to remember getting a request from the OBC/AC > to update the Rules of Conduct (ROC) which, as an officer in several other > community boards of trustees, I feel are somewhat incomplete. We now havea > new membership category, "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" (I think it's now > just "Member Emeritus"), which is not yet defined in the ROC. I haven't > made the changes yet, because I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC to a > request I made for confirmation. With the way my memory has failed me > lately, I may not have actually sent that request for confirmation out, > such is life as a sexagenarian. (I like that title.) If anyone has the > requested change text, please forward it to me, as I seem to have misplaced > or mis-remembered it. > If you want to have a segregated class of membership distinct from > "Current Member", "New Member," "Former Member," or "Inactive Member," > you're going to have to update it in the ROC defining exactly what "Member > Emeritus" means and how someone comes to be designated with that status. > The requested change made explicit reference to the problem of being a > registered sex offender. Now the Rules of Conduct are essentially our > By-Laws, which are (and should be) public. It may even be a requirement of > a New Member to read and understand the ROC. But if I'm just a regular guy > (assume for the moment I am) who wants to join OBC and trade beat-up old > cards, and I read the soon-to-be-updated ROC, and I see that registered sex > offenders get thrown into a category called "Member Emeritus," and I see in > the public directory that there's at least one entry in that category, I'm > going to wonder about that. Or not - maybe I'll just check the box that > says I've read the Rules of Conduct, figure I'll behave myself, then get > approved as a New Member, find my entry in the members-only private > Directory page, and see that somebody in there is listed as a registered > sex offender. Hmmm. > So, for that reason, we need to update the ROC with some very > carefully-worded clarification of this "Member Emeritus" category, not > specifically mentioning anything about specific crimes, just as a catch-all > category of ... well, whatever it means, in general terms. I'm thinking > about something like "Member Emeritus is a category of membership for those > otherwise active members who have experienced life events making regular > membership unsuitable or not applicable," or other similar vague wordings > open to interpretation. > Some here have expressed concern that agencies (employers, police, > lawyers, etc) may possibly associate them with a registered sex offender, > which could be career-threatening for those in educational or religious > administration professions. While I see the chances of that as remote, it > remains a non-zero possibility by the following process: ROC is public --> > ROC defines "Member Emeritus" as a segregated category for convicted felons > --> Public Directory includes one or more entries in the "Member Emeritus" > category --> bad things happen to reputations, lawsuits, and/or employment > conditions. > I will now return to looking into moving the OBC website to a new web > hosting provider. > Best, > WMD > > www.avast.com > > <#m_4974643925281245336_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 04:11:53 +0000 Subject: Heading to Houston! From: Patrick Wattigny Well gang, I don't write much anymore, because I'm busy as a high school president now, but I decided to splurge, and I'm going to go to Houston for games four and five of the World Series. I figure since I just turned 50, and it's been 29 years since the Dodgers last made it to the World Series, I might not be alive at 79 to see it again. So I'll look forward to fun trip,a quick trip, and an expensive trip! If any OBC guys are going to the series, let me know and I would love to see y'all on Saturday or Sunday. Father Pat Wattigny Sent from my iPad ================= Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:59:12 -0700 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=E2=9CSpeak_softly_and_carry_a_?From: Rick Sent from my iPad > On Oct 26, 2017, at 9:50 PM, Rick wrote: > Everything Wayne is saying has value but I want to focus on the last paragraph. > We can debate to what extent it is and I agree hopefully low but the AC put me and ALL members in jeopardy and Wayne lists a few examples. I acknowledge myself and the rest of you have given the AC the right to make decisions for OBC. > I DID NOT give them permission to make decisions that concern my personallife this could effect me,my family,you and your family. > I stand by my opinion that this should have been brought to the general membership before a decision was made. As every person has said this was probably the hardest decision OBC has ever faced I also agree with that. That in itself confirms to me that > the AC should have have come to the conclusion this is bigger than us. > For the people that keep saying if the whole group has a say it could be chaos and divide the group I DISAGREE with that. If only twelve people respond now only twelve people would of responded then thats human nature and/or each persons personality be it you don't like confrontation or like to stay behind the scenes whatever you want to call it. This is not a hind sightis 20/20 thing it should of been very clear there could be outside issues connected to this. > I asked my wife right after the announcement was made that Doug was admitted as a member if I needed to quit OBC because I too worked for the schooldistrict NOT do I need to try and get him kicked out or if I should give him a second chance or not or if I should/should not show compassion. For the people that keep bring these things up you are not reading people's posts you are reading into something that's not there and getting off topic. The general membership needs to have a say when things are out of the normal operations of OBC. > I have heard more times than I can count the phrase or another form this is just cardboard not real life I view this as the AC choosing cardboard over real life. Rick > Sent from my iPad >> On Oct 26, 2017, at 8:35 AM, Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Fellas, I'm just the webmaster. I twiddle the bits when the OBC/AC tellsme >> A couple months ago, I seem to remember getting a request from the OBC/AC to update the Rules of Conduct (ROC) which, as an officer in several other community boards of trustees, I feel are somewhat incomplete. We now havea new membership category, "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" (I think it's now just "Member Emeritus"), which is not yet defined in the ROC. I haven't made the changes yet, because I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC to a request I made for confirmation. With the way my memory has failed me lately, Imay not have actually sent that request for confirmation out, such is lifeas a sexagenarian. (I like that title.) If anyone has the requested changetext, please forward it to me, as I seem to have misplaced or mis-remembered >> If you want to have a segregated class of membership distinct from "Current Member", "New Member," "Former Member," or "Inactive Member," you're going to have to update it in the ROC defining exactly what "Member Emeritus"means and how someone comes to be designated with that status. The requested change made explicit reference to the problem of being a registered sex offender. Now the Rules of Conduct are essentially our By-Laws, which are (and should be) public. It may even be a requirement of a New Member to readand understand the ROC. But if I'm just a regular guy (assume for the moment I am) who wants to join OBC and trade beat-up old cards, and I read the soon-to-be-updated ROC, and I see that registered sex offenders get thrown into a category called "Member Emeritus," and I see in the public directorythat there's at least one entry in that category, I'm going to wonder about that. Or not - maybe I'll just check the box that says I've read the Rules of Conduct, figure I'll behave myself, then get approved as a New Member,find my entry in the members-only private Directory page, and see that somebody in there is listed as a registered sex offender. Hmmm. >> So, for that reason, we need to update the ROC with some very carefully-worded clarification of this "Member Emeritus" category, not specifically mentioning anything about specific crimes, just as a catch-all category of ... well, whatever it means, in general terms. I'm thinking about something like "Member Emeritus is a category of membership for those otherwise active members who have experienced life events making regular membership unsuitable or not applicable," or other similar vague wordings open to interpretation. >> Some here have expressed concern that agencies (employers, police, lawyers, etc) may possibly associate them with a registered sex offender, which could be career-threatening for those in educational or religious administration professions. While I see the chances of that as remote, it remains a non-zero possibility by the following process: ROC is public --> ROC defines "Member Emeritus" as a segregated category for convicted felons --> Public Directory includes one or more entries in the "Member Emeritus" category --> bad things happen to reputations, lawsuits, and/or employment conditions. >> I will now return to looking into moving the OBC website to a new web hosting >> Best, >> WMD >> Virus-free. www.avast.com ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 08:57:17 -0400 To: seventytwop@hotmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Heading to Houston! From: mikesportsfan@aol.com What a treat! Have a ball(game) or 2. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Wattigny seventytwop@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 12:11 am Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Heading to Houston! Well gang, I don't write much anymore, because I'm busy as a high school president now, but I decided to splurge, and I'm going to go to Houston for games four and five of the World Series. I figure since I just turned 50, and it's been 29 years since the Dodgers last made it to the World Series, I might not be alive at 79 to see it again. So I'll look forward to fun trip,a quick trip, and an expensive trip! If any OBC guys are going to the series, let me know and I would love to see y'all on Saturday or Sunday. Father Pat Wattigny Sent from my iPad ================= To: yahoogroups Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 11:30:11 -0500 Subject: RIP Rich Niessen From: mark zentkovich I know many of us wrote last weekend and early this week about our memories of Rich, but I came across a recent envelope from him, and wanted to lookback at my thanks log to see how many times he hit me for a small tribute He sent 17 packages to me from last 12 years that I have records. Several of the entries had words like hundred, and big box, and large stack... Thank you Rich, you are already missed. Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:09:33 +0000 Subject: =?Windows-1252?Q?Re:_[OBC-Ramblings]_=93Speak_softly_and_carry_a_big_stic?From: richard dingman I would suggest it is not necessarily true that if only 12 people now are commenting on this issue, that only 12 people would have had input had it been brought to our attention earlier, before any decision had been made. In fact, it is certainly false, for I would have had spoken up, and I suspect some others would have also. I do agree that this is the kind of issue that was not anticipated when theAC was instituted and is not the kind of decision that is appropriately kept to the judgement of just a small proportion, elected even, of the membership. My personal opinion should not be inferred from anything on this post, and I will reserve expression of such until further consideration and facts areknown. I hope more discussion will ensue. I will say that I am sad that we have, for the moment, lost a member like Nick and hope he will feel like he can return at some point. Richard D From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Rick rick.lyons22@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 12:59 AM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] =93Speak softly and carry a big stick=94 Sent from my iPad On Oct 26, 2017, at 9:50 PM, Rick > Everything Wayne is saying has value but I want to focus on the last paragraph. We can debate to what extent it is and I agree hopefully low but the AC putme and ALL members in jeopardy and Wayne lists a few examples. I acknowledge myself and the rest of you have given the AC the right to make decisionsfor I DID NOT give them permission to make decisions that concern my personal life this could effect me,my family,you and your family. I stand by my opinion that this should have been brought to the general membership before a decision was made. As every person has said this was probably the hardest decision OBC has ever faced I also agree with that. That initself confirms to me that the AC should have have come to the conclusion this is bigger than us. For the people that keep saying if the whole group has a say it could be chaos and divide the group I DISAGREE with that. If only twelve people respond now only twelve people would of responded then thats human nature and/or each persons personality be it you don't like confrontation or like to staybehind the scenes whatever you want to call it. This is not a hind sight is 20/20 thing it should of been very clear there could be outside issues connected to this. I asked my wife right after the announcement was made that Doug was admitted as a member if I needed to quit OBC because I too worked for the school district NOT do I need to try and get him kicked out or if I should give hima second chance or not or if I should/should not show compassion. For thepeople that keep bring these things up you are not reading people's posts you are reading into something that's not there and getting off topic. The general membership needs to have a say when things are out of the normal operations of OBC. I have heard more times than I can count the phrase or another form this isjust cardboard not real life I view this as the AC choosing cardboard overreal life. Rick Sent from my iPad On Oct 26, 2017, at 8:35 AM, Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Fellas, I'm just the webmaster. I twiddle the bits when the OBC/AC tells meto. A couple months ago, I seem to remember getting a request from the OBC/AC to update the Rules of Conduct (ROC) which, as an officer in several other community boards of trustees, I feel are somewhat incomplete. We now have a new membership category, "Member Emeritus In Perpetuum" (I think it's now just "Member Emeritus"), which is not yet defined in the ROC. I haven't madethe changes yet, because I haven't heard back from the OBC/AC to a requestI made for confirmation. With the way my memory has failed me lately, I may not have actually sent that request for confirmation out, such is life asa sexagenarian. (I like that title.) If anyone has the requested change text, please forward it to me, as I seem to have misplaced or mis-remembered it. If you want to have a segregated class of membership distinct from "CurrentMember", "New Member," "Former Member," or "Inactive Member," you're goingto have to update it in the ROC defining exactly what "Member Emeritus" means and how someone comes to be designated with that status. The requested change made explicit reference to the problem of being a registered sex offender. Now the Rules of Conduct are essentially our By-Laws, which are (andshould be) public. It may even be a requirement of a New Member to read and understand the ROC. But if I'm just a regular guy (assume for the moment I am) who wants to join OBC and trade beat-up old cards, and I read the soon-to-be-updated ROC, and I see that registered sex offenders get thrown into a category called "Member Emeritus," and I see in the public directory that there's at least one entry in that category, I'm going to wonder about that. Or not - maybe I'll just check the box that says I've read the Rules of Conduct, figure I'll behave myself, then get approved as a New Member, find my entry in the members-only private Directory page, and see that somebody in there is listed as a registered sex offender. Hmmm. So, for that reason, we need to update the ROC with some very carefully-worded clarification of this "Member Emeritus" category, not specifically mentioning anything about specific crimes, just as a catch-all category of ... well, whatever it means, in general terms. I'm thinking about something like "Member Emeritus is a category of membership for those otherwise active members who have experienced life events making regular membership unsuitable or not applicable," or other similar vague wordings open to interpretation. Some here have expressed concern that agencies (employers, police, lawyers,etc) may possibly associate them with a registered sex offender, which could be career-threatening for those in educational or religious administration professions. While I see the chances of that as remote, it remains a non-zero possibility by the following process: ROC is public --> ROC defines "Member Emeritus" as a segregated category for convicted felons --> Public Directory includes one or more entries in the "Member Emeritus" category -->bad things happen to reputations, lawsuits, and/or employment conditions. I will now return to looking into moving the OBC website to a new web hosting [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif] Subject: My response thrown in the ring.... From: Jim Thayer I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOLI tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel likeI have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name on the OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from anAC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing forthe time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm moving on from dealing. Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approachedby three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on theRSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down to this for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I would be inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever the AC decides. Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place and that some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others in our governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole thing. My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down to this.... 1) I love OBC2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to3) Some revampingof the ROC needs to happen4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally!5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? Have a happy weekend!Jimi ================= To: OBC Ramblings , Jim Thayer Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 19:44:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... From: richard dingman Thanks for speaking up. I had no idea any of this was happening and I imagine many others didn't either. I feel you deserve some public answers / explanations from the AC. Richard D From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 3:24 PM To: OBC Ramblings Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL I tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel likeI have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name onthe OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm movingon from dealing. Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approachedby three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on theRSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down tothis for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I wouldbe inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever theAC Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place andthat some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others inour governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down tothis.... 1) I love OBC 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally! 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? Have a happy weekend! ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 13:00:29 -0700 To: Jim Thayer , OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... From: wite3 ================= Date: 27 Oct 2017 20:09:53 +0000 To: Subject: I feel From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 20:23:59 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, , Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] I feel From: Jim Thayer It's this very reason I almost didn't say anything. I've been receiving some nice e-mails, and although I do appreciate it. I really do just want to see things get quickly resolved, and then back to collecting cards. I have a bunch to put out there on RAOKs and waiver wires and soforth. I should have mentioned in my first e-mail this....I forgive the person whowanted me kicked out. It's ok. Really. I'm disappointed by a lot of things, but what it comes down to is that (without getting too detailed, so that I'm not ACTUALLY kicked out...lol) I'm a Christian dude just trying to find my way through life. I love God, my family, and myfriends, and in that order. At a distant 4th place is baseball cards! I feel bad for saying anything.....don't mean to throw individuals under the bus, but I felt like something needed to be said. Love you all, On =E2=8EFriday=E2=8E, =E2=8EOctober=E2=8E =E2=8E27=E2=8E, =E2=8E2017=E2=8E =E2=8E04=E2=8E:=E2=8E10=E2=8E:=E2=8E01=E2=8E =E2=8EPM=E2=8E =E2=8EEDT, rlabs1@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: sad that this is happening to the best trading group. I don't know what to think. The only knowledge I have is what I read in the last few days. If inthe the past I ever over-stepped my bounds it was not intentional and for that I apologize. Richard Labs ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:09:37 -0400 To: Jim Thayer Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... From: David Luciano 20 years ago it was a bunch of us idiots sending each other cards and having fun. I don=92t think PSA was around then and if it was, nobody I knew cared. My wife and I would get a room at Strongsville and make it an event. Part of me wishes I would have kept collecting but I would never trade it for the bond I have with my family. Fast forward and things are complicated, from technology to the stinkin abbreviations to graded cards. Bottom line Enjoy your blessings from having eyes to see your cards, hands to sort them, and the worst night of sleep on the worst mattress you ever had would be a luxury to some around the world=85. If they had a roof over there head. Keep things in perspective. Work hard, Give to who needs it, and enjoy your blessings. P.S. Jimi is a crappy dealer. He sent me a bunch of cards and told me to just send him what I think is fair. I think he=92s trying to rip me off. How dare he just send me cards. God bless you Jimi. Nice pack coming back at you=85. Ha, you figure it out. P.S.S Just for fun I found one of my old catalogues from 1985 from Howardssports collectibles. There are no grades. Just buy it or not. I got a lot of my cards from there. Bought complete sets also. All great cards=851953 Mantle Money sure does ruin a lot of things. You collect cards with your friends and family because you are in this country. Because of the people who have died keeping our flag flying Because of the people who risk there lives in our cities. Who run in when everyone else is trying to get out. So "Lighten up Francis=94 Have a great Weekend Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL I tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. > Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. > The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel like I have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name on the OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. > Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another strugglethroughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm moving on from dealing. > Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approached by three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on the RSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down to this for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards withmy OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I would be inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever the AC decides. > Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kickedout of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but wasin support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place and that some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others in our governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole > My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down to > 1) I love OBC > 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to > 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen > 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with toughdecisions this year, both externally AND internally! > 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Isthis even possible? > Have a happy weekend! > Jimi ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:34:14 -0400 To: David Luciano Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... From: ShoelessWes Can i cut and paste your note, and then send it also? Well said. Go Blue Jackets. Wes Shepard > On Oct 27, 2017, at 6:09 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > 20 years ago it was a bunch of us idiots sending each other cards and having fun. I don=E2=99t think PSA was around then and if it was, nobody I knew cared. My wife and I would get a room at Strongsville and make it an event. > Part of me wishes I would have kept collecting but I would never trade itfor the bond I have with my family. > Fast forward and things are complicated, from technology to the stinkin abbreviations to graded cards. > Bottom line > Enjoy your blessings from having eyes to see your cards, hands to sort them, and the worst night of sleep on the worst mattress you ever had would be a luxury to some around the world=E2=A6. If they had a roof over therehead. > Keep things in perspective. > Work hard, Give to who needs it, and enjoy your blessings. > P.S. Jimi is a crappy dealer. He sent me a bunch of cards and told me to just send him what I think is fair. > I think he=E2=99s trying to rip me off. How dare he just send me cards. > God bless you Jimi. > Nice pack coming back at you=E2=A6. Ha, you figure it out. > P.S.S Just for fun I found one of my old catalogues from 1985 from Howards sports collectibles. There are no grades. Just buy it or not. I got a lot of my cards from there. Bought complete sets also. All great cards=E2=A61953 Mantle $260.00 > Money sure does ruin a lot of things. > God > Family > Country > You collect cards with your friends and family because you are in this country. > Because of the people who have died keeping our flag flying > Because of the people who risk there lives in our cities. Who run in wheneveryone else is trying to get out. > So "Lighten up Francis=E2=9D > Have a great Weekend > Thanks! > Dave Luciano > 12815 Kingsway Dr, > Chesterland, Ohio > 44026 > 216 406 5940 > daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL Itend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. >> Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. >> The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel like I have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my nameon the OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. >> Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm moving on from dealing. >> Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approached by three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on the RSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came downto this for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. Weall hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I would be inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever the AC decides. >> Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place and that some members of the AC may think they have more weight than othersin our governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in thiswhole >> My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes downto >> 1) I love OBC >> 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to >> 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen >> 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally! >> 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? >> Have a happy weekend! >> Jimi ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 19:41:47 -0400 To: ShoelessWes Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... From: David Luciano You can do whatever you want. It=92s a free country. Kiss the ground we live I was a pall bearer at my uncles funeral. He was at Pearl Harbour when it got attacked. (Sunday morning in church thank God). You think those fellas would be having these conversations. And I=92m Diggin" Go Blue Jackets. Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 27, 2017, at 6:34 PM, ShoelessWes wrote: > Dave, > Can i cut and paste your note, and then send it also? Well said. Go Blue Jackets. > Wes Shepard > On Oct 27, 2017, at 6:09 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> 20 years ago it was a bunch of us idiots sending each other cards and having fun. I don=92t think PSA was around then and if it was, nobody I knew cared. My wife and I would get a room at Strongsville and make it an event. >> Part of me wishes I would have kept collecting but I would never trade it for the bond I have with my family. >> Fast forward and things are complicated, from technology to the stinkin abbreviations to graded cards. >> Bottom line >> Enjoy your blessings from having eyes to see your cards, hands to sort them, and the worst night of sleep on the worst mattress you ever had would be a luxury to some around the world=85. If they had a roof over there head. >> Keep things in perspective. >> Work hard, Give to who needs it, and enjoy your blessings. >> P.S. Jimi is a crappy dealer. He sent me a bunch of cards and told me tojust send him what I think is fair. >> I think he=92s trying to rip me off. How dare he just send me cards. >> God bless you Jimi. >> Nice pack coming back at you=85. Ha, you figure it out. >> P.S.S Just for fun I found one of my old catalogues from 1985 from Howards sports collectibles. There are no grades. Just buy it or not. I got a lot of my cards from there. Bought complete sets also. All great cards=851953 Mantle $260.00 >> Money sure does ruin a lot of things. >> God >> Family >> Country >> You collect cards with your friends and family because you are in this country. >> Because of the people who have died keeping our flag flying >> Because of the people who risk there lives in our cities. Who run in when everyone else is trying to get out. >> So "Lighten up Francis=94 >> Have a great Weekend >> Thanks! >> Dave Luciano >> 12815 Kingsway Dr, >> Chesterland, Ohio >> 44026 >> 216 406 5940 >> daveluciano@me.com >> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >>> I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL I tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally badat coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been aconstant my entire life. >>> Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. >>> The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel like I have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name on the OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. >>> Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. Butit certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm moving on from dealing. >>> Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approached by three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts onthe RSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down to this for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I would be inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whateverthe AC decides. >>> Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about theleadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in placeand that some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others in our governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole thing. >>> My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel likethere's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down to this.... >>> 1) I love OBC >>> 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to >>> 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen >>> 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally! >>> 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? >>> Have a happy weekend! >>> Jimi ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 18:33:28 -0500 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: I am leaving also From: Raymond Luurs I am sure that no suprise reading some of the AC or former AC reponse about the issue and how they reacted to Nick's reponse. I know that my opinion means absolutely nothing so I will nogi ve it. This was a great organization at one time but know the majority which never changes ges on. ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 20:26:56 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: What is happening here gentlemen? From: Ed Hutchinson The past few days have been pretty tough for the group. People are making emotional decisions and for the first time, I am seeing a serious divisiveness within the group. Are we still friends here folks? That is what this really needs to boil down to, on my opinion. Decisions were made. They are in the past. What I want to know is, what does the future hold? Is this the obc that I, and all of you, joined? A group of men who, while cardboard may bring us together, are much more than cards, we are friends. Because if we aren't , then this wonderful group has run its course. If we can't disagree civilly, then how can we all remain a group of friends? Friends fight, friends bicker, but friends don't abandon each other, or allow decisions to ruin the respect and friendship that has been forged over many years! Respectfully submitted Ed Hutchinson ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 22:23:56 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? From: Ken M Ed,   I'll tell you exactly what is happening here - this is just a small taste of the same thing that happened to the Advisory Committee a few months ago. To give you a little more perspective: the most messages logged by the OBC-AC server in a month from 2003-2017 was 89. In May and June this year, those numbers were both just over 200. That doesn't include the direct emails (at one point we weren't sure the server was working correctly), the face to face meetings, phone calls and even a group text session. There was plenty of bad blood, lost sleep and harsh words. I found no respite in the place I go to get AWAY from the drama. At one point we were debating how to debate. Strong friendships dissolved, irreparably damaged by personal attacks - and that was just the eight of us. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 8:27 PMTo: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com;Cc: Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? The past few days have been pretty tough for the group. People are making emotional decisions and for the first time, I am seeing a serious divisiveness within the group.  Are we still friends here folks?  That is what this really needs to boil down to, on my opinion. Decisions were made.  They are in the past. What I want to know is, what does the future hold? Is this the obc that I, and all of you, joined?  A group of men who, while cardboard may bring us together, are much more than cards, we are friends. Because if we aren't ,  then this wonderful group has run its course.  If we can't disagree civilly, then how can we all remain a group of friends? Friends fight, friends bicker,  but friends don't abandon each other, or allow decisions to ruin the respect and friendship that has been forged over many years! Respectfully submitted Ed Hutchinson  ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 23:07:04 -0400 To: Ken M Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? From: Anthony Hello all Have been crazy at work but have been tracking this concern. I have been in a high level of management in Hotels for many years managing anywhere from 80-400 people from all different backgrounds and interests. I know what it is like to make decisions in a bubble or a committee large or small. I learned for every action there is a reaction . Every decision isboth correct and not correct........ popular and not popular. The key is to keep true to the mission, cause , rules or what core values you have set in place. Yes that sometimes is bent based on circumstances. That being said , when you are challenged by a decision which was made you need to listen and engage . Does not mean the decision will change But people want to feel their opinion is heard. On top of all this stuff above we all need to realize that the group is passionate and speaking out is healthy. I can not tell you how many times I have been "dogged " by a co-worker or associate and never took it to heart and did not retaliate in anyway and moved on. We need to take some of this and move on and just ensure we adjust a touch to realign ourselves as the great group we are. People will come and go for many reasons. They also come back=9C On another note- please understand that we voted the team to the group and they spend there own time handling many aspects to the group which we benefit from everyday . Be well all Sent from Anthony Arbeeny iPhone > On Oct 27, 2017, at 10:23 PM, Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Ed, > I'll tell you exactly what is happening here - this is just a small taste of the same thing that happened to the Advisory Committee a few months ago. To give you a little more perspective: the most messages logged by theOBC-AC server in a month from 2003-2017 was 89. In May and June this year,those numbers were both just over 200. That doesn't include the direct emails (at one point we weren't sure the server was working correctly), the face to face meetings, phone c alls and even a group text session. There was plenty of bad blood, lost sleep and harsh words. I found no respite in the place I go to get AWAY from the drama. At one point we were debating how todebate. Strong friendships dissolved, irreparably damaged by personal attacks - and that was just the eight of us. > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 8:27 PM > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; > Cc: > Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? ================= Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 22:18:05 -0500 To: Ken M Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? From: OBC Nick P Great facts. Perfect info to share. Thank you. April, may, June....three months. 400+ emails Friendships dissolved. True friendships last through disagreements. Acquaintances don=E2=99t. Three months and four hundred emails and more....if only there were a way to cut those numbers down. How about to seven days? That=E2=99s the moratorium on an AC voting onan application from the announcement to the beginning of a vote? 8% of the time, roughly. Seems like a helluva improvement. A solid percentage, at least half, of the current inactive list is unknown to 1/3=E2=99rd or more of the current active membership. This group has members from many walks of life. There are many sets of life experiences to draw from in the pool of 150. Those life experiences allow members to read and reread an application and spot potential red flags. It allows a conversation to happen. It draws from the knowledge of the group. If we can identify a Tipton 10 char broiled to an extra well done, we can identify red flags in an application. Seven members do not have the experiences of the 150 to spot everything. As much of the inactive membership, and those not even inactive but just gone, are unknown to much of the active membership, what=E2=99s the harm of an application? Learn something about the person, from the person. With the current system we may as well not even do an application for a newmember. Somebody largely unknown to the membership body, he did a trade or two, bring em in. That=E2=99s all it=E2=99s taken for an inactive member to come back. Shorter time frame And better overall decisions regarding membership Almost seems too easy??? Eleven letters, that=E2=99s it. Application. Nick Pelletier > On Oct 27, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Ed, > I'll tell you exactly what is happening here - this is just a small taste of the same thing that happened to the Advisory Committee a few months ago. To give you a little more perspective: the most messages logged by theOBC-AC server in a month from 2003-2017 was 89. In May and June this year,those numbers were both just over 200. That doesn't include the direct emails (at one point we weren't sure the server was working correctly), the face to face meetings, phone c alls and even a group text session. There was plenty of bad blood, lost sleep and harsh words. I found no respite in the place I go to get AWAY from the drama. At one point we were debating how todebate. Strong friendships dissolved, irreparably damaged by personal attacks - and that was just the eight of us. > Ken M > Sent from my not so smart phone. > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > From: Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 8:27 PM > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; > Cc: > Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? ================= To: Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 00:12:44 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? From: "Sal Domino" I have been wrestling for days with an outline of an email I wrote days agoas to whether or not to send it out. I have read it 50x and asked for guidance from other members of the AC as to its accuracy and if it was even worth sending out. But I have to take umbrage with Nick=E2=99s description of the ROC. =E2=9CThe ROC is shit. It is a poorly worded shroud of crapthat veteran members are hiding behind to add hits to their own wantlists.=E2=9C I was part of the original board that drafted the first version of the ROC. Over the past 20 years it has been in effect, following boards(including ones I have served on), have made changes and additions and subtractions based on events or just being out of date. Every board has workedextremely hard to =E2=9Cget it right=E2=9D regarding the ROC. This is our Bill of Rights. Every word since the beginning has been well thought out and discussed. We have had some brilliant people on the board to make sure the wording was correct as to any changes we made. You don=E2=99t just change the constitution, you discuss it time and time again to make surewhat you are doing is correct. If you think this present discussion is something else, some will remember the reasons Jim Montgomery put together thefirst AC. Because of what happened then, caused the formation of VCT. We lost a good number of members then. Thank God we haven=E2=99t lost anyoneover this. If you=E2=99d like some OBC history, feel free to contact me. How dare you call that document =E2=9Cshit=E2=9D! That document has served us well for 20 years (with minor changes along the way). That document also made it possible for you to join OBC. Every person who applies to OBC has the same opportunity/obstacles to face when filling out an app. And conversely, people who have to leave for one reason or another, have an easier time to get back in, as they should. They already know how we work, but something happened in their lives that caused them to take a break. We havealready made changes to the ROC regarding those on the inactive list. I am beyond disappointed in your choice of words regarding the foundation we have built this group on. And because of the work done by Jim Montgomery,we are still the largest and first baseball card trading group on the internet. Shame on you for calling every person who has ever served on the AC =E2=9Cshit=E2=9D for trying to do our best for the greater good of OBC, because that ROC was written and amended by the boards voted on by the members of the group. Sorry to the rest of you, but that=E2=99s just how I I still don=E2=99t know if I am sending out that email. I don=E2=99t want it to come across the wrong way or be misinterpreted. If anyone would like to discuss this in more depth, I am all ears. Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of OBC Nick P nachobcards@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 11:18 PM To: Ken M Cc: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? Great facts. Perfect info to share. Thank you. April, may, June....three months. 400+ emails Friendships dissolved.. True friendships last through disagreements. Acquaintances don=E2=99t. Three months and four hundred emails and more....if only there were a way to cut those numbers down. How about to seven days? That=E2=99s the moratorium on an AC voting onan application from the announcement to the beginning of a vote? 8% of the time, roughly. Seems like a helluva improvement. A solid percentage, at least half, of the current inactive list is unknown to 1/3=E2=99rd or more of the current active membership. This group has members from many walks of life. There are many sets of life experiences to draw from in the pool of 150. Those life experiences allow members to read and reread an application and spot potential red flags. It allows a conversation to happen. It draws from the knowledge of the group. If we can identify a Tipton 10 char broiled to an extra well done, we can identify red flags in an application. Seven members do not have the experiences of the 150 to spot everything. As much of the inactive membership, and those not even inactive but just gone, are unknown to much of the active membership, what=E2=99s the harm of an application? Learn something about the person, from the person. With the current system we may as well not even do an application for a newmember. Somebody largely unknown to the membership body, he did a trade or two, bring em in. That=E2=99s all it=E2=99s taken for an inactive member to come back. Shorter time frame And better overall decisions regarding membership Almost seems too easy??? Eleven letters, that=E2=99s it. Application. Nick Pelletier On Oct 27, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] I'll tell you exactly what is happening here - this is just a small taste of the same thing that happened to the Advisory Committee a few months ago. To give you a little more perspective: the most messages logged by the OBC-AC server in a month from 2003-2017 was 89. In May and June this year, those numbers were both just over 200. That doesn't include the direct emails (at one point we weren't sure the server was working correctly), the faceto face meetings, phone c alls and even a group text session. There was plenty of bad blood, lost sleep and harsh words. I found no respite in the place I go to get AWAY from the drama. At one point we were debating how to debate. Strong friendships dissolved, irreparably damaged by personal attacks - and that was just the eight of us. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 8:27 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] What is happening here gentlemen? ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:41:50 -0400 To: wwesmyster2@aol.com, daveluciano@me.com Subject: Website still down? From: Mike Glasser Is anyone else having problems accessing the site still? I can't get to any of it anymore. Mike Glasser The Goddard School in Sparks, MD 14630 York Road Sparks, MD 21152 -----Original Message----- From: ShoelessWes wwesmyster2@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: David Luciano Cc: Jim Thayer ; OBC Ramblings Sent: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... Can i cut and paste your note, and then send it also? Well said. Go Blue Jackets. Wes Shepard On Oct 27, 2017, at 6:09 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: 20 years ago it was a bunch of us idiots sending each other cards and having fun. I don=E2=99t think PSA was around then and if it was, nobody I knew cared. My wife and I would get a room at Strongsville and make it an event. Part of me wishes I would have kept collecting but I would never trade it for the bond I have with my family. Fast forward and things are complicated, from technology to the stinkin abbreviations to graded cards. Bottom line Enjoy your blessings from having eyes to see your cards, hands to sort them, and the worst night of sleep on the worst mattress you ever had would be a luxury to some around the world=E2=A6. If they had a roof over there head. Keep things in perspective. Work hard, Give to who needs it, and enjoy your blessings. P.S. Jimi is a crappy dealer. He sent me a bunch of cards and told me to just send him what I think is fair. I think he=E2=99s trying to rip me off. How dare he just send me cards. God bless you Jimi. Nice pack coming back at you=E2=A6. Ha, you figure it out. P.S.S Just for fun I found one of my old catalogues from 1985 from Howardssports collectibles. There are no grades. Just buy it or not. I got a lot of my cards from there. Bought complete sets also. All great cards=E2=A61953 Mantle $260.00 Money sure does ruin a lot of things. You collect cards with your friends and family because you are in this country. Because of the people who have died keeping our flag flying Because of the people who risk there lives in our cities. Who run in when everyone else is trying to get out. So "Lighten up Francis=E2=9D Have a great Weekend Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL I tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel likeI have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name onthe OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm movingon from dealing. Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approachedby three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on theRSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down tothis for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I wouldbe inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever theAC Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place andthat some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others inour governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down tothis.... 1) I love OBC 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally! 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? Have a happy weekend! ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:52:36 -0400 To: miglasser@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website still down? From: mikesportsfan@aol.com It is still down as we are migrating to a new host site. An announcement will come out when it is back up. Once up we expect the issues of the site going down should dissipate. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Mike Glasser miglasser@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: wwesmyster2 ; daveluciano Cc: jimivintage ; obc-ramblings Sent: Sat, Oct 28, 2017 1:41 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Website still down? Is anyone else having problems accessing the site still? I can't get to any of it anymore. Mike Glasser The Goddard School in Sparks, MD 14630 York Road Sparks, MD 21152 -----Original Message----- From: ShoelessWes wwesmyster2@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: David Luciano Cc: Jim Thayer ; OBC Ramblings Sent: Fri, Oct 27, 2017 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My response thrown in the ring.... Can i cut and paste your note, and then send it also? Well said. Go Blue Jackets. Wes Shepard On Oct 27, 2017, at 6:09 PM, David Luciano daveluciano@me.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: 20 years ago it was a bunch of us idiots sending each other cards and having fun. I don=E2=99t think PSA was around then and if it was, nobody I knew cared. My wife and I would get a room at Strongsville and make it an event. Part of me wishes I would have kept collecting but I would never trade it for the bond I have with my family. Fast forward and things are complicated, from technology to the stinkin abbreviations to graded cards. Bottom line Enjoy your blessings from having eyes to see your cards, hands to sort them, and the worst night of sleep on the worst mattress you ever had would be a luxury to some around the world=E2=A6. If they had a roof over there head. Keep things in perspective. Work hard, Give to who needs it, and enjoy your blessings. P.S. Jimi is a crappy dealer. He sent me a bunch of cards and told me to just send him what I think is fair. I think he=E2=99s trying to rip me off. How dare he just send me cards. God bless you Jimi. Nice pack coming back at you=E2=A6. Ha, you figure it out. P.S.S Just for fun I found one of my old catalogues from 1985 from Howardssports collectibles. There are no grades. Just buy it or not. I got a lot of my cards from there. Bought complete sets also. All great cards=E2=A61953 Mantle $260.00 Money sure does ruin a lot of things. You collect cards with your friends and family because you are in this country. Because of the people who have died keeping our flag flying Because of the people who risk there lives in our cities. Who run in when everyone else is trying to get out. So "Lighten up Francis=E2=9D Have a great Weekend Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Jim Thayer jimivintage@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: I've been mostly silent through all this for a few reasons, but the number one reason is that I would NOT be a good member on a debate team! LOL I tend to understand the point of view of both sides, and I'm generally bad at coming up with my own decisions based on what's presented. It's been a constant my entire life. Believe it or not, I'm also a bit of an introvert, and I hate confrontation. The third reason I haven't really said anything, is that I really feel likeI have no real voice in this group. I tried three times to get my name onthe OBC Dealer page, and although I requested to even have someone acknowledge me on the request....I never once received a message back from an AC. All null and void right now since I'm backing out of dealing for the time being though. But even so....nothing. Very disappointed. Also, it got back to me a few months ago that an AC wanted to have me removed from the group because I was a dealer. Huh? I was voted an OBC Certified Dealer and I played by the rules. It doesn't make sense to me. But it certainly didn't help my already present self-esteem.....another struggle throughout my life. Again, ultimately, it doesn't matter because I'm movingon from dealing. Unlike what seems like most people in the group witnessed, I WAS approachedby three AC members contacting me this summer regarding my thoughts on theRSO joining our group. I appreciated being asked. It really came down tothis for me (at the time): 1) I just want to collect baseball cards with my OBC brothers; 2) we are all sinners, and he's paid for his crimes. We all hope to get a second chance in life. That, however, doesn't mean I wouldbe inviting him over to my house for tea! And 3) I'll trust whatever theAC Unfortunately, in my case, knowing that an AC was trying to get me kicked out of the group for doing nothing wrong and abiding by the rules, but was in support of an RSO joining the group, has me a bit concerned about the leadership we currently have. Sometimes I wonder if politics are in place andthat some members of the AC may think they have more weight than others inour governing body. I can certainly understand Nick's position in this whole My apologies for rambling about my own personal issues, but I feel like there's more in place here than just Nick's concerns. For me it comes down tothis.... 1) I love OBC 2) I'll send cards to whoever I want to 3) Some revamping of the ROC needs to happen 4) I feel bad for most of the ACs, who have had to be burdened with tough decisions this year, both externally AND internally! 5) I really just want to collect and not worry about stuff like this. Is this even possible? Have a happy weekend! ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:43:17 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Thanks From: "Thomas W. Billing" Thanks for the 1961 Simmons. I appreciate it and will delete it from my want list when I figure out how. Thanks again. Tom Billing ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 19:54:52 -0400 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, obc-ac@yahoogroups.com Subject: My two cents (worth less in the current economic market than it was From: Joshua Levine Good Afternoon All, After some prodding (some gentle, some not so gentle but all appreciated) Ihave been convinced to speak about what is going on. First, let me say that I love OBC. Some of the friendships predate my high school and college graduation, my marriage, my son, etc. OBC has been a constant background to my life (we officially became a group in 1991, but the OBC spirit and name was there since 1988ish). I honestly have read the emails everyday and still love seeing them (I cannot remember the last time there was not a day in which an obc email was not received by me...probably close to 15 years or more!). Okay...enough sappy stuff...moving on. First, let me speak to Nick directly for a moment. Thank you. Your method might have seemed rough to some but I know it comes from a place of frustration and love for the community and you just want to see it become better. Iwill tell you though, you are not the first and this is not the first timewe have had something like this happen. Years ago, in the OBC lore, there was a member in good standing who had a problem with the direction the group was heading and the way the AC was being set up at the time. It blew up and he not only left, he stopped speaking to many of us (and I was at his wedding!!). Things like this happen. It is life and often OBC feels like family, and as most of us know, the biggest fights we have are with family, butat the end of the day, you are still family and we move on. This won't be the last complaint, fight, or whatever you want to call it. We will move on. So thanks Nick for prodding us forward. Second, I have served several times on the AC over the years. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is not. I have given a great deal of thought about this situation and now instead of just complaining, I am going to offer some suggestions/possible solutions. AC can discuss as they wish and honestly, so can the general membership, and I encourage that. I have pretty thick skin and will not be hurt if you do not use a single one of my suggestions. 1. Transparency IS important. So, here is my proposal for more transparency. The AC meets monthly. I propose that on the first of the month, the AC puts out an agenda of what is to be discussed for that month (meaning that ifyou want something discussed and you send a note to the AC on Dec. 2nd, itwill not be taken up, unless super urgent, until Jan. 1st). In addition tothe agenda for the upcoming month, any results of any votes taken will posted as well. It should list what is up for discussion and a possible vote.Members will then have two weeks (14 days) to email the AC or discuss on ramblings any input they have about the matters listed. After two weeks, public input is closed, and the AC can then spend the next two weeks discussing, now with member input, the items. A vote will take place on any items discussed on or before the last day of the month, the AC can put off a vote if more discussion, input, or research needs to be done. If a vote is put off it will also be noted on the agenda with a simple reason i.e. "more research needed". On the first of the next month the process starts over. 2. Voting...I know people want to see how people vote. This one I am not sosure about. In the early days of the AC, I made it public knowledge of howI voted sometimes and why, usually when asked by a member. This led to some hard feelings in some cases. I do not want to put the AC through that. I prefer voting remain anonymous at this time. We change up members often enough anyway so if you don't like some particular outcomes, run yourself or vote for different people. 3. Returning members and classifications. I do like the idea of a type of re-entry application. It does not have to be elaborate...really just two questions..."Why do you want back in now?" and "Is there anything to disclose that might be relevant to the membership at large." Now, there might be personal reasons you do not want to disclose to the membership at large and I would not force anyone to disclose something super personal. Being upfront and honest is often a good thing but can be extremely difficult as well. I do not like the current classification (just because I am stickler for vocabulary). Emeritus is an honorary title. Unfortunately, right under that is the RSO title. Is there another way to classify that title...Maybe "Member with Special Circumstances"? I honestly have no idea here and I am sure this was discussed at length in the AC. No disrespect to Doug either. 4. Members you might have issues with. Honestly, one of the great things about OBC is it opened up a wider world for me when I was just a smart ass teenager. Now, as a smart ass adult, I can appreciate different views, religions, political beliefs, and life choices. Do I get along with everyone in OBC, honestly, pretty much. Are there people I am better friends with than others, of course. All that being said, there is no rule that you have to trade with someone and there is no rule you have to speak with someone. Doug made it clear that he would only interact with people who gave the okay. I suspect that many of you already interact with convicted felons, rsos, and other unseemly people in your day to day lives (knowingly or unknowingly). I know this is a different level and more personal than some and if you feel uncomfortable with that I understand but, your level of activity with that person can be managed by you, yourself. If you have a serious issue with someone, the AC can (and has in the past) help mediate the issue if needed or 5. Members who are leaving over this (yes, I am talking to you RAY, :), Don't. You will regret it (as many others have). And then when you want to come back you might have to fill out an application and really, who likes paperwork (even a two question application!), save yourself the time and effortand 6. Open communication. I do like seeing a great deal of members chime in onthis and most of it is still positive (Sal's and Ken's stand out...although hard to tell when Sal is standing :) Please, don't be like Josh and wait a week. If you have something to say that you feel is important, please do.I won't judge you either way. 7. OBC is old. OBC predates ebay, amazon, netflix, AOL, Google, and probably 95 % of the internet. Heck, our website and domain name is probably one of the oldest active sites on the internet. (Wayne, is there a way to check that out?). We will be around for a lot longer. I miss former members like Phil C., Terry W., Dave K., Mickey M., Mark S., Wally H., Carlos A., Jim M.Ryan D. and even Rick E. Whether they left on their own or were taken fromus permanently, I still feel that they are part of our history. Yes, two thirds of the membership was not around for the formation of the AC or the ROCs. But that does not mean they cannot be updated and changed. OBC has gone through updates and changes throughout its history. Heck, thanks to Waynewe are going through another change right now. OBC started as a message ona Bulletin Board type posting under the Hobbies heading on Prodigy...we have come along way from that posting. We will go where the internet,baseballcards, and friends take us. So I apologize for the long email (except to Ken, he deserves to read a long email by someone not named Ken once in a while) but I did want to touch on a few of these things while still fresh in my mind. I am open to discussion, suggestions, or anything. I am not on the AC currently but I hope they read this and look at this as trying to help. Let me know what you think (or Joshua Levine Proud OBC member since 1991ish ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 19:59:25 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: 1939 playback question From: JDahms ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:30:17 -0400 To: Obc Ranblings Subject: 1972 baseball help From: JDahms ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 20:52:53 -0400 To: JDahms Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question From: Anson Whaley Hi JD - I personally think so. I bought about 60 in that shape a month or so ago and paid, on average, about $3.50 each and felt that was reasonable. I've seen them go for less sometimes but I think that's a solid price if you can get them. On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Hey guys. Wondered if 3 bucks apeice for 39 playballs in fair condition is > a decent price or no > Thanks in advance > JD > Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S=AE 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= To: "'Obc Ranblings'" Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 21:10:05 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question From: "Sal Domino" I=E2=99m with Anson. The prices have crept up since that box of Playballs were found for all years. If you see any of these, I=E2=99d be happy to take them off your hands=E2=A6 1939 Play Ball - DODGERS - Need 16 of 26 6a- Leo Durocher - Name in Upper Case Letters 6b- Leo Durocher - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 13a- Luke Hamlin RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 13b- Luke Hamilin RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 74b- Cookie Lavagetto RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 95a- Whit Wyatt RC - Name in Upper Letters 95b- Whit Wyatt RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 96a- Babe Phelps RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 96b- Babe Phelps RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 111b- Van Lingle Mungo RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 140- Ray Hayworth RC 142- Ira Hutchinson RC 151- Hugh Casey RC 154- Johnny Hudson RC 159- Red Evans RC 160- Gene Moore RC Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anson Whaley ansonwhaley@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:53 PM To: JDahms Cc: Obc Ranblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question Hi JD - I personally think so. I bought about 60 in that shape a month or so ago and paid, on average, about $3.50 each and felt that was reasonable. I've seen them go for less sometimes but I think that's a solid price if you can get them. On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Hey guys. Wondered if 3 bucks apeice for 39 playballs in fair condition is a decent price or no Thanks in advance Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S=AE 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= To: , Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 21:20:59 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] My two cents (worth less in the current economic market than it was when I joined OBC)--please read From: "Sal Domino" In response to Josh=E2=99s comments on #6=E2=A6 (BTW Josh was part ofthe original committee that was the original AC formed by Jim Montgomery) Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joshua Levine Wite3@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:55 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; obc-ac@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] My two cents (worth less in the current economic market than it was when I joined OBC)--please read Good Afternoon All, After some prodding (some gentle, some not so gentle but all appreciated) Ihave been convinced to speak about what is going on. First, let me say that I love OBC. Some of the friendships predate my high school and college graduation, my marriage, my son, etc. OBC has been a constant background to my life (we officially became a group in 1991, but the OBC spirit and name was there since 1988ish). I honestly have read the emails everyday and still love seeing them (I cannot remember the last time there was not a day in which an obc email was not received by me...probably close to 15 years or more!). Okay...enough sappy stuff...moving on. First, let me speak to Nick directly for a moment. Thank you. Your method might have seemed rough to some but I know it comes from a place of frustration and love for the community and you just want to see it become better. Iwill tell you though, you are not the first and this is not the first timewe have had something like this happen. Years ago, in the OBC lore, there was a member in good standing who had a problem with the direction the group was heading and the way the AC was being set up at the time. It blew up and he not only left, he stopped speaking to many of us (and I was at his wedding!!). Things like this happen. It is life and often OBC feels like family, and as most of us know, the biggest fights we have are with family, butat the end of the day, you are still family and we move on. This won't be the last complaint, fight, or whatever you want to call it. We will move on. So thanks Nick for prodding us forward. Second, I have served several times on the AC over the years. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is not. I have given a great deal of thought about this situation and now instead of just complaining, I am going to offer some suggestions/possible solutions. AC can discuss as they wish and honestly, so can the general membership, and I encourage that. I have pretty thick skin and will not be hurt if you do not use a single one of my suggestions. 1. Transparency IS important. So, here is my proposal for more transparency. The AC meets monthly. I propose that on the first of the month, the AC puts out an agenda of what is to be discussed for that month (meaning that ifyou want something discussed and you send a note to the AC on Dec. 2nd, itwill not be taken up, unless super urgent, until Jan. 1st). In addition tothe agenda for the upcoming month, any results of any votes taken will posted as well. It should list what is up for discussion and a possible vote.Members will then have two weeks (14 days) to email the AC or discuss on ramblings any input they have about the matters listed. After two weeks, public input is closed, and the AC can then spend the next two weeks discussing, now with member input, the items. A vote will take place on any items discussed on or before the last day of the month, the AC can put off a vote if more discussion, input, or research needs to be done. If a vote is put off it will also be noted on the agenda with a simple reason i.e. "more research needed". On the first of the next month the process starts over. 2. Voting...I know people want to see how people vote. This one I am not sosure about. In the early days of the AC, I made it public knowledge of howI voted sometimes and why, usually when asked by a member. This led to some hard feelings in some cases. I do not want to put the AC through that. I prefer voting remain anonymous at this time. We change up members often enough anyway so if you don't like some particular outcomes, run yourself or vote for different people. 3. Returning members and classifications. I do like the idea of a type of re-entry application. It does not have to be elaborate...really just two questions..."Why do you want back in now?" and "Is there anything to disclose that might be relevant to the membership at large." Now, there might be personal reasons you do not want to disclose to the membership at large and I would not force anyone to disclose something super personal. Being upfront and honest is often a good thing but can be extremely difficult as well. I do not like the current classification (just because I am stickler for vocabulary). Emeritus is an honorary title. Unfortunately, right under that is the RSO title. Is there another way to classify that title...Maybe "Member with Special Circumstances"? I honestly have no idea here and I am sure this was discussed at length in the AC. No disrespect to Doug either. 4. Members you might have issues with. Honestly, one of the great things about OBC is it opened up a wider world for me when I was just a smart ass teenager. Now, as a smart ass adult, I can appreciate different views, religions, political beliefs, and life choices. Do I get along with everyone in OBC, honestly, pretty much. Are there people I am better friends with than others, of course. All that being said, there is no rule that you have to trade with someone and there is no rule you have to speak with someone. Doug made it clear that he would only interact with people who gave the okay. I suspect that many of you already interact with convicted felons, rsos, and other unseemly people in your day to day lives (knowingly or unknowingly). I know this is a different level and more personal than some and if you feel uncomfortable with that I understand but, your level of activity with that person can be managed by you, yourself. If you have a serious issue with someone, the AC can (and has in the past) help mediate the issue if needed or 5. Members who are leaving over this (yes, I am talking to you RAY, :), Don't. You will regret it (as many others have). And then when you want to come back you might have to fill out an application and really, who likes paperwork (even a two question application!), save yourself the time and effortand 6. Open communication. I do like seeing a great deal of members chime in onthis and most of it is still positive (Sal's and Ken's stand out...although hard to tell when Sal is standing :) Please, don't be like Josh and wait a week. If you have something to say that you feel is important, please do.I won't judge you either way. 7. OBC is old. OBC predates ebay, amazon, netflix, AOL, Google, and probably 95 % of the internet. Heck, our website and domain name is probably one of the oldest active sites on the internet. (Wayne, is there a way to check that out?). We will be around for a lot longer. I miss former members like Phil C., Terry W., Dave K., Mickey M., Mark S., Wally H., Carlos A., Jim M.Ryan D. and even Rick E. Whether they left on their own or were taken fromus permanently, I still feel that they are part of our history. Yes, two thirds of the membership was not around for the formation of the AC or the ROCs. But that does not mean they cannot be updated and changed. OBC has gone through updates and changes throughout its history. Heck, thanks to Waynewe are going through another change right now. OBC started as a message ona Bulletin Board type posting under the Hobbies heading on Prodigy...we have come along way from that posting. We will go where the internet,baseballcards, and fri ends take us. So I apologize for the long email (except to Ken, he deserves to read a long email by someone not named Ken once in a while) but I did want to touch on a few of these things while still fresh in my mind. I am open to discussion, suggestions, or anything. I am not on the AC currently but I hope they read this and look at this as trying to help. Let me know what you think (or Joshua Levine Proud OBC member since 1991ish ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 21:31:05 -0500 To: Sal Domino Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] My two cents (worth less in the current economic market than it was when I joined OBC)--please read From: OBC Nick P So I=E2=99m sitting at a Halloween party and I don=E2=99t know anybody.. What better time to read and reread emails. I=E2=99ve read josh=E2=99s three or four times now. Great message. Great ideas. Thanks josh! The one thing I=E2=99d change is the voting info. Share how you vote. George, Jon, Paul, yoko vote yes. Ringo and Elvis vote no, van abstains. First of the month an announcement goes out.....here is what we are going to talk about this month. Speak or don=E2=99t. Below that.....Here is what we voted on and who voted yea. Put your name on it. Though I=E2=99ve read josh=E2=99s whole message a few times.....I want to keep mine short. Take this, run with it. Fill it out. Nick Pelletier > On Oct 28, 2017, at 8:20 PM, 'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > In response to Josh=E2=99s comments on #6=E2=A6 (BTW Josh was part of the original committee that was the original AC formed by Jim Montgomery) > > Sal Domino > OBC - 1992 > https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joshua Levine Wite3@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:55 PM > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; obc-ac@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] My two cents (worth less in the current economicmarket than it was when I joined OBC)--please read > Good Afternoon All, > After some prodding (some gentle, some not so gentle but all appreciated)I have been convinced to speak about what is going on. > First, let me say that I love OBC. Some of the friendships predate my high school and college graduation, my marriage, my son, etc. OBC has been a constant background to my life (we officially became a group in 1991, but the OBC spirit and name was there since 1988ish). I honestly have read the emails everyday and still love seeing them (I cannot remember the last time there was not a day in which an obc email was not received by me...probably close to 15 years or more!). Okay...enough sappy stuff...moving on. > First, let me speak to Nick directly for a moment. Thank you. Your methodmight have seemed rough to some but I know it comes from a place of frustration and love for the community and you just want to see it become better.I will tell you though, you are not the first and this is not the first time we have had something like this happen. Years ago, in the OBC lore, there was a member in good standing who had a problem with the direction the group was heading and the way the AC was being set up at the time. It blew upand he not only left, he stopped speaking to many of us (and I was at his wedding!!). Things like this happen. It is life and often OBC feels like family, and as most of us know, the biggest fights we have are with family, but at the end of the day, you are still family and we move on. This won't be the last complaint, fight, or whatever you want to call it. We will move on. So thanks Nick for prodding us forward. > Second, I have served several times on the AC over the years. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is not. I have given a great deal of thought about this situation and now instead of just complaining, I am going to offer some suggestions/possible solutions. AC can discuss as they wish and honestly,so can the general membership, and I encourage that. I have pretty thick skin and will not be hurt if you do not use a single one of my suggestions. > 1. Transparency IS important. So, here is my proposal for more transparency. The AC meets monthly. I propose that on the first of the month, the AC puts out an agenda of what is to be discussed for that month (meaning that if you want something discussed and you send a note to the AC on Dec. 2nd, it will not be taken up, unless super urgent, until Jan. 1st). In addition to the agenda for the upcoming month, any results of any votes taken will posted as well. It should list what is up for discussion and a possible vote. Members will then have two weeks (14 days) to email the AC or discuss onramblings any input they have about the matters listed. After two weeks, public input is closed, and the AC can then spend the next two weeks discussing, now with member input, the items. A vote will take place on any items discussed on or before the last day of the month, the AC can put off a voteif more discussion, input, or research needs to be done. If a vote is put off it will also be noted on the agenda with a simple reason i.e. "more research needed". On the first of the next month the process starts over. > 2. Voting...I know people want to see how people vote. This one I am not so sure about. In the early days of the AC, I made it public knowledge of how I voted sometimes and why, usually when asked by a member. This led to some hard feelings in some cases. I do not want to put the AC through that. I prefer voting remain anonymous at this time. We change up members often enough anyway so if you don't like some particular outcomes, run yourself orvote for different people. > 3. Returning members and classifications. I do like the idea of a type ofre-entry application. It does not have to be elaborate...really just two questions..."Why do you want back in now?" and "Is there anything to disclose that might be relevant to the membership at large." Now, there might be personal reasons you do not want to disclose to the membership at large and I would not force anyone to disclose something super personal. Being upfront and honest is often a good thing but can be extremely difficult as well. I do not like the current classification (just because I am stickler for vocabulary).. Emeritus is an honorary title. Unfortunately, right under that is the RSO title. Is there another way to classify that title...Maybe "Member with Special Circumstances"? I honestly have no idea here and I am sure this was discussed at length in the AC. No disrespect to Doug either. > 4. Members you might have issues with. Honestly, one of the great things about OBC is it opened up a wider world for me when I was just a smart ass teenager. Now, as a smart ass adult, I can appreciate different views, religions, political beliefs, and life choices. Do I get along with everyone inOBC, honestly, pretty much. Are there people I am better friends with thanothers, of course. All that being said, there is no rule that you have to trade with someone and there is no rule you have to speak with someone. Doug made it clear that he would only interact with people who gave the okay. I suspect that many of you already interact with convicted felons, rsos, and other unseemly people in your day to day lives (knowingly or unknowingly). I know this is a different level and more personal than some and if you feel uncomfortable with that I understand but, your level of activity with that person can be managed by you, yourself. If you have a serious issue with someone, the AC can (and has in the past) help mediate the issue if needed or wanted. > 5. Members who are leaving over this (yes, I am talking to you RAY, :), Don't. You will regret it (as many others have). And then when you want to come back you might have to fill out an application and really, who likes paperwork (even a two question application!), save yourself the time and effort and stay. > 6. Open communication. I do like seeing a great deal of members chime in on this and most of it is still positive (Sal's and Ken's stand out...although hard to tell when Sal is standing :) Please, don't be like Josh and wait a week. If you have something to say that you feel is important, please do. I won't judge you either way. > 7. OBC is old. OBC predates ebay, amazon, netflix, AOL, Google, and probably 95 % of the internet. Heck, our website and domain name is probably oneof the oldest active sites on the internet. (Wayne, is there a way to check that out?). We will be around for a lot longer. I miss former members like Phil C., Terry W., Dave K., Mickey M., Mark S., Wally H., Carlos A., Jim M. Ryan D. and even Rick E. Whether they left on their own or were taken from us permanently, I still feel that they are part of our history. Yes, twothirds of the membership was not around for the formation of the AC or theROCs. But that does not mean they cannot be updated and changed. OBC has gone through updates and changes throughout its history. Heck, thanks to Wayne we are going through another change right now. OBC started as a message on a Bulletin Board type posting under the Hobbies heading on Prodigy...we have come along way from that posting. We will go where the internet,baseball cards, and fri ends take us. > So I apologize for the long email (except to Ken, he deserves to read a long email by someone not named Ken once in a while) but I did want to touchon a few of these things while still fresh in my mind. I am open to discussion, suggestions, or anything. I am not on the AC currently but I hope they read this and look at this as trying to help. Let me know what you think (or > Joshua Levine > Proud OBC member since 1991ish ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 02:27:37 +0000 To: Sal Domino Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question From: Matthew Glidden Hi JD, will add that 39PB high numbers are ~$10 for commons. (At least, I'm OK paying that for them. :-) On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 9:10 PM 'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I=E2=99m with Anson. The prices have crept up since that box of Playballs > found for all years. If you see any of these, I=E2=99d be happy to take them off > your hands=E2=A6 > *1939 Play Ball - DODGERS - Need 16 of 26* > * 6a- Leo Durocher - Name in Upper Case Letters 6b- Leo Durocher - Name in > Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 13a- Luke Hamlin RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 13b- Luke Hamilin RC - > Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 74b- Cookie Lavagetto RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 95a- Whit Wyatt RC - Name in Upper Letters 95b- Whit Wyatt RC - Name > in Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 96a- Babe Phelps RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 96b- Babe Phelps RC - > Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 111b- Van Lingle Mungo RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters* > * 140- Ray Hayworth RC * > * 142- Ira Hutchinson RC * > * 151- Hugh Casey RC * > * 154- Johnny Hudson RC * > * 159- Red Evans RC * > * 160- Gene Moore RC * > Sal Domino > OBC - 1992 > https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto: > OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Anson Whaley > ansonwhaley@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > *Sent:* Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:53 PM > *To:* JDahms > *Cc:* Obc Ranblings > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question > Hi JD - I personally think so. I bought about 60 in that shape a month or > so ago and paid, on average, about $3.50 each and felt that was reasonable. > I've seen them go for less sometimes but I think that's a solid price if > you can get them. > Anson > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > Hey guys. Wondered if 3 bucks apeice for 39 playballs in fair condition is > a decent price or no > Thanks in advance > JD > Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S=AE 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 23:03:16 -0400 To: jd3681@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question From: mikesportsfan@aol.com When you say "fair" condition are you referring to between poor and goodor are you referring to OK? Big difference in value. As Spike points outhi #s, which start at #116, are significantly more valuable. You will also notice from Sal that there are variations as to whether the names on backcome mixed upper and lower letters or all caps. While no price differenceis listed I have found the mixed case letters to be much tougher to find. Of course, is there any star power in the group. If the cards are not trashed, but all commons I would think $2.50 a card. If there is anything of the tougher cards, then $3.50 would be a good price. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Glidden glidden.matthew@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: Sal Domino Cc: Obc Ranblings Sent: Sat, Oct 28, 2017 10:34 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question Hi JD, will add that 39PB high numbers are ~$10 for commons. (At least, I'mOK paying that for them. :-) On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 9:10 PM 'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: I=E2=99m with Anson. The prices have crept up since that box of Playballs were found for all years. If you see any of these, I=E2=99d be happy to take them off your hands=E2=A6 1939 Play Ball - DODGERS - Need 16 of 26 6a- Leo Durocher - Name in Upper Case Letters 6b- Leo Durocher - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 13a- Luke Hamlin RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 13b- Luke Hamilin RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 74b- Cookie Lavagetto RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 95a- Whit Wyatt RC - Name in Upper Letters 95b- Whit Wyatt RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 96a- Babe Phelps RC - Name in Upper Case Letters 96b- Babe Phelps RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 111b- Van Lingle Mungo RC - Name in Upper and Lower Case Letters 140- Ray Hayworth RC 142- Ira Hutchinson RC 151- Hugh Casey RC 154- Johnny Hudson RC 159- Red Evans RC 160- Gene Moore RC Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Anson Whaley ansonwhaley@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:53 PM To: JDahms Cc: Obc Ranblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1939 playback question Hi JD - I personally think so. I bought about 60 in that shape a month or so ago and paid, on average, about $3.50 each and felt that was reasonable. I've seen them go for less sometimes but I think that's a solid price if you can get them. On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, JDahms jd3681@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Hey guys. Wondered if 3 bucks apeice for 39 playballs in fair condition is a decent price or no Thanks in advance Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S=AE 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ================= Date: 29 Oct 2017 04:10:15 +0000 To: Subject: Just saying From: tvalacak@comcast.net ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 09:57:55 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Just saying From: JAY TYSVER In my years of management, I've found two crucial points in managing successfully. First, making changes as problems arise can create a convoluted system which is paralyzed by bureacracy. It is reactive, not proactive. I doubt there are many managers who operate entirely in a reactive manner. Often the solution is to go back to the starting point and scrap all fixes. When an isolated case, a reaction and a whole scale change turns into effecting all others who did nothing wrong and often makes things harder to work. It doesn't improve the system. Second, the role of management is to move the company forward. The job is to protect the big picture. Often, individuals are hurt in this process. Butthe company survives. The job of the AC is to keep OBC strong. If we were to ask the AC to publicize all notes and actions, it would become utter chaos. I imagine eight people trying to solve a difficult problem is really tough. Imagine the chaos and disdain if 140 people were to try to weigh in. As well, nothing would ever be accomplished. We have to trust people to do the job we elected them to do. The only vote I favor having 140 members weigh in on is the yearly elections. Otherwise nothing will ever get done. I can pretty much guarantee that allowing major issues to be voted on by 140 people will lead to the end of OBC. The only suggestion I would offer is that we have a three member OBC historian panel. These would be members who have 15+ years in OBC and have servedon the AC at one point or another. They could offer definition to the ROC or actions as they were taken in the past. This would be a valuable tool for the AC to seek definition of rules. This would be similar to the Supreme Court. Other notes--- - Personally, I'm not enthralled by the Emeritus title as that implies senior advisory responsibilities. I would think Adjunct would be a better title. - It would be okay for the AC to release minutes in bullet form either quarterly or twice a year at least a month or two or a prescribed period after the discussions. This would give us all an idea what the AC was working on without leaving all things up for general discussion. - All requests to the AC by members deserve a vote or a discussion. If the problem is not resolved or a vote is taken, that needs to be told to the member. There seems to be a lack of communication in this instance. - Lastly, I urge patience with the AC. My understanding is this is a problem which has been much discussed. The solution(s) are not quick and easy. Just because we don't hear an answer right away doesn't mean it is being ignored. But, the ac should say it is still being discussed. Also, they may notvote in our favor. In which case, we can make our case again, but may needto wait for a new AC to form. Jay Tysver From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of tvalacak@comcast.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 11:10 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Just saying This certainly has been an interesting week in OBC. Back before I got sick, I served a term on the AC. I was very proud to help guide our collectinggroup through the year. Although we did not have any major issues, I always felt I had a voice and appreciated the time I served. I am glad to see discussion on the ROC. I believe that ultimately, this will lead to improvements in the ROC and our group overall. I am disappointed that members are leaving or going inactive. I am more disappointed thatfriendships have been ended due to this discussion. I really like some of the positive emails I have read. Josh's email today stands out. I think there are some ideas to consider, and I hope and believe the AC discusses some of these ideas. As far as transparency goes, i don't need it. If I care to know how someone voted, I would email and ask. But I realize from reading the emails that many of you want this transparency, so I am fine with that if we move in that direction. I am also a believer in second chances. Heck, I'm a believer of 17 chances. Prior to becoming sick I was teacher. I worked in special education, working with kids with behavior disorders as well as Autism. I see a lot of mistakes. I see many kids learn from their mistakes.. I see many who don't. But, I am definitely willing to give kids second third, fourth... chances. It so great to see kids/people turn the corner and start making gooddecisions. Finally, I would like to request something. As someone who never really thought I took things for granted, I think it's important to take a minute and reflect and be thankful. My health issues certainly have made me realize that I did take things for granted. So, I ask you to give thanks. Be thankful that you can breath. Be thankful you can enjoy a sunny day. Be thankful you can put in a hard, physical day of work. Be thankful and proud for what you have done and the opportunity to do even more tomorrow. I love this group. I believe we are the most unique group special group ofcollectors out there and I look forward to OBC moving forward. ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 14:57:08 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings Subject: T205 photos From: Geno Wagner Fellas -- If you like T205s, you have to check out this thread on N54: T205 Image Composite Animations - Net54baseball.com Forums | | | | | T205 Image Composite Animations - Net54baseball.com Forums T205 Image Composite Animations Net54baseball Vintage (Pre-WWII) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | | So cool!! Take Care,Geno ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 06:31:18 -1000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Aloha From: Doug DeJong Woke up this morning in Honolulu with rain and heavy overcast skies. But Idon't care because it is my first true vacation in two and a half years and I am going to enjoy it! If anything comes my way from yesterday until 9 days from now, pardon me for not getting a prompt thank you out! I promise I will after I get back and get caught up. Sent from my iPhone ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 14:46:15 -0400 To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: help ID'ing a card please From: biggies@aol.com I've got a card with "The War Years" on the back. The front looks like Play Ball card. Any help? ================= Date: 29 Oct 2017 18:47:17 +0000 To: Subject: 1962 Topps Green Tint/Variation question From: jehutch75@gmail.com ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 15:00:36 -0400 To: jehutch75@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1962 Topps Green Tint/Variation question From: "Thomas W. Billing" You are correct and good sleuthing. I am hoping Tom Housley will weight inon this as he is the godfather of the 1962 greenies and has a page with all pairs in that series. The inset photos version is considered the greenieas it appears to have been issued when the greenies were issued. Tom can enlighten us all and is great at this. Tom Billing > On Oct 29, 2017, at 2:47 PM, jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > I picked up a lot of 62 Woodies this past week. While going through them,I found two variations for card 132, the Angels Team card. One has inset photos and one does not. Doing a bit of research, I have found that it seemsthat the inset photo card is the green tint variety. Is this the case all of the time, some of the time, or is my research incorrect? Also, is there a premium to one of these vs. the other? > Thanks! > Ed ================= To: , Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 14:54:46 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please From: "Matt Yudt" TCMA War Years Set. Not sure about that front though =E2=93 I think theTCMA set is just a photo with no writing. It=E2=99s a set I am trying to find cheap. Here=E2=99s a ebay link to one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-80-TCMA-THE-WAR-YEARS-BASEBALL-CARDS-90-card-complete-set/302497913077?hashitem466e47d8f5:g:VusAAOSwEfBZsEWI Matt Yudt From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 2:46 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please I've got a card with "The War Years" on the back. The front looks like Play Ball card. Any help? ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 15:03:31 -0400 To: mryudt@gmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please From: biggies@aol.com Thanks Matt, do you need #41, Pollett? -----Original Message----- From: Matt Yudt To: biggies ; obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 2:54 pm Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please TCMA War Years Set. Not sure about that front though =E2=93 I think the TCMA set is just a photo with no writing. It=E2=99s a set I am trying to find cheap. Here=E2=99s a ebay link to one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-80-TCMA-THE-WAR-YEARS-BASEBALL-CARDS-90-card-complete-set/302497913077?hashitem466e47d8f5:g:VusAAOSwEfBZsEWI Matt Yudt From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 2:46 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please I've got a card with "The War Years" on the back. The front looks like Play Ball card. Any help? ================= Date: 29 Oct 2017 19:33:29 +0000 To: Subject: Re: 1962 Topps Green Tint/Variation question From: directorth@aol.com ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 16:59:42 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: toppsaholic From: "Thomas W. Billing" I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join OBC. Hereis the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, that is OK asI do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the buyer. New message from: toppsaholic (8,965) Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this person/company/whatever in our group They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on my items. They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! Ed Hutchinson On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some > abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join > OBC. Here is the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, > that is OK as I do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. > This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari > of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the > buyer. > TomBilling > New message from: toppsaholic > (8,965[image: Green Star]) > I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to be > so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal out > of stuff -- > I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the > word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? > notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative elements > to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied --- > I don't feel like typing back and forth with you ---simple fact is we do > not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back > to them to say we are no good etc > just WHO do you think you are anyway? > LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! > wow you have too much time on your hands. > so now what URBIE > Reply > Your previous message > Notice how you refer to me as as a jerk. I have chosen not to refer to you > in a negative light. You may recall THIS email you sent to me after George > bought the pair: > New message from: toppsaholic (7,749Green Star) > Hi buddy hope you're well. Someone bought those 2 for 100 last night and > in a weird way we are hoping it was you who bought them thru a friends > account perhaps.... the truth is we wanted u to have them we just DO NOT > like your rude messages like johny hopp has anything to do with it. How > could the world go around if buyers just tolds sellers what they once paid > for an item ? > You would do soooo much better with a friendlier tone ..i assure you. > This sounds like you wanted me to get them and now you question selling > them to me. This also answers the fact that you thought George was doing > this. > If this matter is not resolved now, I will be contacting eBay about your > business practices. ================= To: Ed Hutchinson Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 21:27:04 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: Tim newcomb FWIW, this guy has a horrible reputation on the N54 board as well- No good! From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 4:08 PM Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this person/company/whatever in our group They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on my They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! Ed Hutchinson On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] > I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join OBC. Hereis the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, that is OK asI do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the buyer. New message from: toppsaholic (8,965[Green Star]) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 21:43:03 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1962 Topps Green Tint/Variation question From: Aaron Shirley ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 18:13:01 -0400 To: Tim newcomb Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: Mike Galbreath I've seen a lot of negative stuff about this guy in the past and don't want to see him in OBC, either. Mike Galbreath On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Tim newcomb apspr@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] < OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > FWIW, this guy has a horrible reputation on the N54 board as well- > No good! > ------------------------------ > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on > behalf of Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Sunday, October 29, 2017 4:08 PM > *Cc:* OBC Ramblings > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic > Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this > person/company/whatever in our group > They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on > my items. > They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all > the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." > Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! > Ed Hutchinson > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' > billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] yahoogroups.com> wrote: >> I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some >> abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join >> OBC. Here is the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, >> that is OK as I do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. >> This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari >> of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the >> buyer. >> TomBilling >> New message from: toppsaholic >> > (8,965[image: Green Star]) >> > I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to >> be so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal >> out of stuff -- >> I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the >> word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? >> notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative >> elements to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied >> --- >> I don't feel like typing back and forth with you ---simple fact is we do >> not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back >> to them to say we are no good etc >> just WHO do you think you are anyway? >> LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! >> wow you have too much time on your hands. >> so now what URBIE >> Reply >> > Your previous message >> Notice how you refer to me as as a jerk. I have chosen not to refer to >> you in a negative light. You may recall THIS email you sent to me after >> George bought the pair: >> New message from: toppsaholic (7,749Green Star) >> Hi buddy hope you're well. Someone bought those 2 for 100 last night and >> in a weird way we are hoping it was you who bought them thru a friends >> account perhaps.... the truth is we wanted u to have them we just DO NOT >> like your rude messages like johny hopp has anything to do with it. How >> could the world go around if buyers just tolds sellers what they once paid >> for an item ? >> You would do soooo much better with a friendlier tone ..i assure you. >> This sounds like you wanted me to get them and now you question selling >> them to me. This also answers the fact that you thought George was doing >> this. >> If this matter is not resolved now, I will be contacting eBay about your >> business practices. ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 19:13:41 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: Ken M 1) I think we should let him in for the comedic value alone.2) He seems pretty knowledgable about the hobby and could bring a lot to the table.3) He probably has an extensive selection of hard to find dupes to share.4) He seems very personable and easy to get along with. I can't wait to meet him.5) Numbers 1 through 4 are lies. No way he gets in. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: Mike Galbreath mike.galbreath@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 6:13 PMTo: Tim newcomb;Cc: Ed Hutchinson;OBC Ramblings;Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic I've seen a lot of negative stuff about this guy in the past and don't want to see him in OBC, either. Mike Galbreath On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Tim newcomb apspr@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote:   FWIW, this guy has a horrible reputation on the N54 board as well- No good! From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 4:08 PM Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic  Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this person/company/whatever in our group They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on my items. They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! Ed Hutchinson On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote:  I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join OBC.  Here is the last email he sent to me.  If you want to let him in, that is OK as I do not like to black ball anyone.  This guy is poison. This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the buyer. New message from: toppsaholic (8,965)I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to be so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal out of stuff -- I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative elements to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied --- I don't feel like typing back and forth with you ---simple fact is we do not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back to them to say we are no good etc just WHO do you think you are anyway? LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! wow you have ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 19:21:32 -0400 To: Tim newcomb , Ed Hutchinson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: JDahms ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 19:31:48 -0400 To: biggies@aol.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Try 1975 TCMA The War Years, if you have a Big SCD or check Ebay. A scanmay also help. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 2:46 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please I've got a card with "The War Years" on the back. The front looks like Play Ball card. Any help? ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 19:34:55 -0400 To: biggies@aol.com, mryudt@gmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please From: mikesportsfan@aol.com I need #79 Suder to complete my set. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: mryudt ; obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 3:03 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please Thanks Matt, do you need #41, Pollett? -----Original Message----- From: Matt Yudt To: biggies ; obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 2:54 pm Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please TCMA War Years Set. Not sure about that front though =E2=93 I think theTCMA set is just a photo with no writing. It=E2=99s a set I am trying to find cheap. Here=E2=99s a ebay link to one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/1977-80-TCMA-THE-WAR-YEARS-BASEBALL-CARDS-90-card-complete-set/302497913077?hashitem466e47d8f5:g:VusAAOSwEfBZsEWI Matt Yudt From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of biggies@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 2:46 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] help ID'ing a card please I've got a card with "The War Years" on the back. The front looks like Play Ball card. Any help? ================= To: "'Ken M'" , Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 16:35:24 -0700 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: "Grant Rainsley" This is one AC vote I am really looking forward to. Perhaps we can establish a land-speed record for dealing with it. From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken M cardclctor@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: October 29, 2017 4:14 PM To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic 1) I think we should let him in for the comedic value alone. 2) He seems pretty knowledgable about the hobby and could bring a lot to the 3) He probably has an extensive selection of hard to find dupes to share. 4) He seems very personable and easy to get along with. I can't wait to meet 5) Numbers 1 through 4 are lies. No way he gets in. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------ From: Mike Galbreath mike.galbreath@gmail.com Date: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 6:13 PM To: Tim newcomb; Cc: Ed Hutchinson;OBC Ramblings; Subject:Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic I've seen a lot of negative stuff about this guy in the past and don't wantto see him in OBC, either. Mike Galbreath On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Tim newcomb apspr@msn.com [OBC-Ramblings] FWIW, this guy has a horrible reputation on the N54 board as well- No good! From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2017 4:08 PM Cc: OBC Ramblings Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this person/company/whatever in our group They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on my They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! Ed Hutchinson On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join OBC. Hereis the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, that is OK asI do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the buyer. New message from: toppsaholic (8,965Green Star) I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to be so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal out of stuff -- I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative elements to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied --- I don't feel like typing back and for th with you ---simple fact is we do not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back tothem to say we are no good etc just WHO do you think you are anyway? LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! wow you have This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com ================= Date: 30 Oct 2017 00:42:16 +0000 To: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] 1962 Topps Green Tint/Variation question From: directorth@aol.com ================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 21:52:07 -0400 To: Randy Griffin Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 From: Mark Talbot Bob please include me in the holiday exchange. - Mark Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 25, 2017, at 1:38 PM, Randy Griffin rvkgriffin24@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Hi Bob: > Hope all is going well. Put me into the Christmas Exchange once again. > Randy Griffin > On Wednesday, October 25, 2017 11:26 AM, "'Bob Donaldson' obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: > Well, it is finally that time of year. The OBC holiday card exchange. > For those of you who are new, or have bad memories, the holiday exchange is when participants are randomly assigned the name of another participant to buy and mail a gift to the person they have been assigned to. On December 25th - Christmas for some, just after of Hanukkah ( I believe), the winter solstice or Yule for pagans (not sure if we have any pagans) or just a fun day to get a gift. > Rules (the fine print) > 1. Gifts should be in the $10 range. The best gifts are not usually the most expensive. Try to get creative. > 2. Envelopes should be clearly marked "do not open to Dec 25" or "Do not open till Xmas". > 3. Open your present on the morning of the 25th > 4. Report your present and who gave it to you on the ramblings serverASAP. > How it works. > 1. REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL (please do not send a new message as it may miss my email filter), put your name in the message, that will make it easier to track things. Or send an email to me with &q! uot; OBC Xmas Exchange 2017" in the subject. Please include your name just to make sure I don't mix up your email address. Please make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017is in the subject line! That makes it easy to track. > 2. Wait a few days for a message from me telling you who your victim is based on a patented semi-randomization technique, > 3. Buy something nice, wrap it, mark it "do not open" till the 25th, and send it out. > NOTE: We are running a little late this year so hurry up and respond. I will try to get assignments out ASAP > Merry Christmas! > FINAL PLEA =E2=93 Please make my life easier!!!! > Reply to this email or make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 is in the subjectline > Give your FULL first AND last name in the message of your email > Thanks and have fun!! > Bob Donaldson ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 01:32:34 +0000 To: Grant Rainsley Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: Matthew Glidden Forgive me if I vote five times. On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 7:35 PM 'Grant Rainsley' grains@shaw.ca [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > This is *one *AC vote I am really looking forward to. Perhaps we can > establish a land-speed record for dealing with it. > Grant > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto: > OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken M cardclctor@aol.com > [OBC-Ramblings] > *Sent:* October 29, 2017 4:14 PM > *To:* obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic > 1) I think we should let him in for the comedic value alone. > 2) He seems pretty knowledgable about the hobby and could bring a lot to > the table. > 3) He probably has an extensive selection of hard to find dupes to share. > 4) He seems very personable and easy to get along with. I can't wait to > meet him. > 5) Numbers 1 through 4 are lies. No way he gets in. > Ken M > *Sent from my not so smart phone.* > http://kenmorganti.weebly.com > ------ Original message------ > *From: *Mike Galbreath mike.galbreath@gmail.com > <%20mike.galbreath@gmail.com> [OBC-Ramblings] > *Date: *Sun, Oct 29, 2017 6:13 PM > *To: *Tim newcomb; > *Cc: *Ed Hutchinson;OBC Ramblings; > *Subject:*Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic > I've seen a lot of negative stuff about this guy in the past and don't > want to see him in OBC, either. > thanks > Mike Galbreath > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Tim newcomb apspr@msn.com > [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > FWIW, this guy has a horrible reputation on the N54 board as well- > No good! > ------------------------------ > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com on > behalf of Ed Hutchinson jehutch75@gmail.com > [OBC-Ramblings] > *Sent:* Sunday, October 29, 2017 4:08 PM > *Cc:* OBC Ramblings > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic > Agree with Tom here wholeheartedly- we don't want this > person/company/whatever in our group > They lowballed me on ebay a while back, so I blocked them from bidding on > my items. > They asked me why, and I told them. Their response "Yeah, we lowball all > the time, and hope that some sucker falls for our low offers." > Do we want this kind of person representing our group? I sure dont! > Ed Hutchinson > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' > billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] < > OBC-Ramblings-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some > abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join > OBC. Here is the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, > that is OK as I do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. > This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari > of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the > buyer. > TomBilling > New message from: *toppsaholic* > (8,965[image: Green Star]) > I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to be > so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal out > of stuff -- > I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the > word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? > notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative elements > to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied --- > I don't feel like typing back and for th with you ---simple fact is we do > not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back > to them to say we are no good etc > just WHO do you think you are anyway? > LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! > wow you have > > www.avg.com > > <#m_-1594530046194387128_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 05:13:32 +0000 To: obc ramblings Subject: Question about directions card for 1936 S&S Game From: Matthew Glidden Ended up with a directions card in a prewar lot. PSA's graded 10 of them: https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/baseball-cards/1936-s-game/directions-playing-game/43586 There's no value shown for the directions card, unlike the S&S player cards that have 40+ graded examples. Is there a minimum # of graded cards needed (or transacted) before they suggest pricing? (Don't think this card's expensive, it just brought the question to mind.) ================= Date: 30 Oct 2017 06:39:17 +0000 To: Subject: THAT GAME! From: mikerw7@gmail.com ================= To: Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 02:47:31 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: "Sal Domino" Walk Shortly and Carry a Big Stick! How about Altuve? I know my guts were turning. Same thing, no horse in the race but I sure want to see Houston get their first championship. So many ups and downs and potentially heart breaking moments. Springer=E2=99s misplay had my heart sink into my stomach. I think we will see Verlander pull a Shilling or Randy Johnson moment and just be the stud that he is. At least Houston knows what they will be doing this off season=E2=A6 searching for a bullpen! Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 2:39 AM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I reallyknow that hurt. Everyone else: Did you see that game? i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watchinga 1-0 gem. This was not that game. This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin wasalready up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring,to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. ================= To: Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 02:52:22 -0400 Subject: WOOHOOO! From: "Sal Domino" The site is back up! Thanks to Wayne and Joe for everything they did to make us whole again! Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 05:49:08 -0400 To: glidden.matthew@gmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Question about directions card for 1936 S&S From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Interesting that my 2012 SCD does not even mention the card as part of the set. My wantlist just increased. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Glidden glidden.matthew@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: obc ramblings Sent: Mon, Oct 30, 2017 1:13 am Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Question about directions card for 1936 S&S Game Ended up with a directions card in a prewar lot. PSA's graded 10 of them: https://www.psacard.com/cardfacts/baseball-cards/1936-s-game/directions-playing-game/43586 There's no value shown for the directions card, unlike the S&S player cardsthat have 40+ graded examples. Is there a minimum # of graded cards needed(or transacted) before they suggest pricing? (Don't think this card's expensive, it just brought the question to mind.) ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 10:57:03 +0000 (UTC) To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] WOOHOOO! From: Glenn Codere Has the full site been restored? I'm still only getting the HostGator "Getting Started" page when I go to www.oldbaseball.com On Monday, October 30, 2017, 6:52:31 AM GMT, 'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: The site is back up! Thanks to Wayne and Joe for everything they did to make us whole again! Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ ================= Date: 30 Oct 2017 11:51:50 +0000 To: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] WOOHOOO! From: directorth@aol.com ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:12:55 -0400 To: "Thomas W. Billing" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] toppsaholic From: Bob Donaldson Are you on his bad buyers list? http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t246828 On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 4:59 PM, 'Thomas W. Billing' billingtw@sbcglobal.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > I have to beat a dead horse, especially since there has been some > abrasiveness, but I need to let everyone know that this guy wants to join > OBC. Here is the last email he sent to me. If you want to let him in, > that is OK as I do not like to black ball anyone. This guy is poison. > This is the last email he sent after I contacted him trying to buy a pari > of cards he once sold and then they mysteriously never delivered to the > buyer. > TomBilling > New message from: toppsaholic > (8,965[image: Green Star]) > I used the word jerk becuz that's what you have been to us. you used to be > so rude telling us what our cards were worth you made such a big deal out > of stuff -- > I love that you will type type type and analyze m words like I used the > word jerk ? yes. why? because I think youre a jerk. ok? > notice how your first message on this topic had many manipulative elements > to it --true you didn't say we weren't ethical ...but you implied --- > I don't feel like typing back and forth with you ---simple fact is we do > not like how you operate --mentioning your grop and how you will run back > to them to say we are no good etc > just WHO do you think you are anyway? > LOOK at you sending us saved messages from months ago !! > wow you have too much time on your hands. > so now what URBIE > Reply > Your previous message > Notice how you refer to me as as a jerk. I have chosen not to refer to you > in a negative light. You may recall THIS email you sent to me after George > bought the pair: > New message from: toppsaholic (7,749Green Star) > Hi buddy hope you're well. Someone bought those 2 for 100 last night and > in a weird way we are hoping it was you who bought them thru a friends > account perhaps.... the truth is we wanted u to have them we just DO NOT > like your rude messages like johny hopp has anything to do with it. How > could the world go around if buyers just tolds sellers what they once paid > for an item ? > You would do soooo much better with a friendlier tone ..i assure you. > This sounds like you wanted me to get them and now you question selling > them to me. This also answers the fact that you thought George was doing > this. > If this matter is not resolved now, I will be contacting eBay about your > business practices. ================= To: EEK , Sal Domino , Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:28:01 -0500 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: mark zentkovich I enjoyed watching the many turns of this game as well, but about halfway through, I kept telling myself that we need the old baseballs back=E2=A6just too many home runs (and strikeouts) Mark Zentkovich Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: EEK originaleek1@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 8:54 AM To: Sal Domino; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Awesome game. In fact this post season has given us one awesome game after another. How many freaking home runs have been hit? I do have a horse in this race for a few reasons. Justin Verlander: it's great to see him prove a lot of "Tiger fans" wrong. Listening to the local sports talk shows would lead one to believe that JV was over the hill and should have retired a couple years ago. I will always pull for the AL team period! (Cleveland would really have tested my resolve.) Altuve: An undertall stud to be sure. The people of Houston deserve something to cheer about. Lastly: Puig! On Monday, October 30, 2017 2:47 AM, "'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: Walk Shortly and Carry a Big Stick! How about Altuve? I know my guts were turning. Same thing, no horse in the race but I sure want to see Houston get their first championship. So many ups and downs and potentially heart breaking moments. Springer=E2=99s misplay had my heart sink into my stomach. I think we will see Verlander pull a Shilling or Randy Johnson moment and just be the stud that he is. At least Houston knows what they will be doing this off season=E2=A6 searching for a bullpen! Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 2:39 AM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I really know that hurt. Everyone else: Did you see that game? i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watching a 1-0 gem. This was not that game. This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin was already up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring, to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. ================= To: EEK Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:40:13 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: Patrick Wattigny ================= To: Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 13:10:19 -0400 Subject: OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 From: "Bob Donaldson" SECOND NOTICE - WILL START MAKING ASSIGNMENTS LATER THIS WEEK Well, it is finally that time of year. The OBC holiday card exchange. For those of you who are new, or have bad memories, the holiday exchange is when participants are randomly assigned the name of another participant to buy and mail a gift to the person they have been assigned to. On December 25th - Christmas for some, just after of Hanukkah ( I believe), the winter solstice or Yule for pagans (not sure if we have any pagans) or just a fun day to get a gift. Rules (the fine print) 1. Gifts should be in the $10 range. The best gifts are not usually the most expensive. Try to get creative. 2. Envelopes should be clearly marked "do not open to Dec 25" or "Do not open till Xmas". 3. Open your present on the morning of the 25th 4. Report your present and who gave it to you on the ramblings server How it works. 1. REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL (please do not send a new message as it may miss my email filter), put your name in the message body, that will make it easier to track things. Or send an email to me with " OBC Xmas Exchange 2017" in the subject. Please include your name just to make sure I don't mix up your email address. Please make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 is in the subject line! That makes it easy to track. 2. Wait a few days for a message from me telling you who your victim is based on a patented semi-randomization technique, 3. Buy something nice, wrap it, mark it "do not open" till the 25th, and send it out. NOTE: We are running a little late this year so hurry up and respond. I will try to get assignments out ASAP Merry Christmas! FINAL PLEA - Please make my life easier!!!! Reply to this email or make sure OBC Xmas Exchange 2017 is in the subject Give your FULL first AND last name in the message of your email Thanks and have fun!! Bob Donaldson ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:50:41 -0400 To: mark zentkovich Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! [1 Attachment] From: David Luciano Hey Mark, I=92m with you. And how about 5 hours to play 9? Other than Houston and LA, how many kids got to watch that amazing seesaw battle. Kids are the foundation of the future=85 How many baseball fans is MLB creating. I was sad my son had to pack it in. Too many tests for him today. But my daughter was texting me till the bloody end. Go tribe=85 next year Dave Luciano 12815 Kingsway Dr, Chesterland, Ohio 216 406 5940 On Oct 30, 2017, at 12:28 PM, mark zentkovich mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from mark zentkovich included below] > I enjoyed watching the many turns of this game as well, but about halfwaythrough, I kept telling myself that we need the old baseballs back=85just too many home runs (and strikeouts) > Mark Zentkovich > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > From: EEK originaleek1@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 8:54 AM > To: Sal Domino; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! > Awesome game. In fact this post season has given us one awesome game after another. How many freaking home runs have been hit? I do have a horse in this race for a few reasons. > Justin Verlander: it's great to see him prove a lot of "Tiger fans" wrong. Listening to the local sports talk shows would lead one to believe that JV was over the hill and should have retired a couple years ago. > I will always pull for the AL team period! (Cleveland would really have tested my resolve.) > Altuve: An undertall stud to be sure. > The people of Houston deserve something to cheer about. > Lastly: Puig! > On Monday, October 30, 2017 2:47 AM, "'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: > Walk Shortly and Carry a Big Stick! > How about Altuve? I know my guts were turning. Same thing, no horse in the race but I sure want to see Houston get their first championship. So manyups and downs and potentially heart breaking moments. Springer=92s misplayhad my heart sink into my stomach. I think we will see Verlander pull a Shilling or Randy Johnson moment and just be the stud that he is. At least Houston knows what they will be doing this off season=85 searching for a bullpen! > Sal Domino > OBC - 1992 > https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 2:39 AM > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! > Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I really know that hurt. > Everyone else: > Did you see that game? > i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watching a 1-0 gem. This was not that game. > This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin was already up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring, to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. > Thoughts? ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 20:56:04 +0100 (CET) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: T J VALACAK MIME-Version: 1.0 That was unbelievable. SImply an amazing game. I don't consider it a classic game, but I do consider it one of the most exciting World Series games I have watched. When I don't have anything vested in the Series (Sox aren't playing) I like to root for a 7 game series that goes to the final inning. I'm the same way in the Super Bowl Give me a game that goes down to thelast two minutes. I'm hoping the Dodgers can get to Verlander and somehow, figure out a way to stop the Astros tomorrow. Then, Game 7, anything goes! T.J. Valacak OBC member since August 2005 http://www.oldbaseball.com/wantlists/valacak.htm > On October 30, 2017 at 7:39 AM "mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" > Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I really know that hurt. > Everyone else: > Did you see that game? > i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watching a 1-0 gem. This was not that game. > This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin was already up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring, to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. > Thoughts? ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 21:03:17 +0100 (CET) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] WOOHOOO! From: T J VALACAK MIME-Version: 1.0 Thanks for the tip Tom. I was able to pull up my wantlist, but was still getting the error message when attempting to go to OBC site. Clearing the history, cookies and cache worked. Awesome! Thanks Wayne, Joe, and anyone else involved for getting us back on track! T.J. Valacak OBC member since August 2005 http://www.oldbaseball.com/wantlists/valacak.htm > On October 30, 2017 at 12:51 PM "directorth@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings]" > I was too, but then I went to my browser history & deleted my cache and my cookies - and the next time I went to oldbaseball.com, it worked. So try clearing out your history, cookies, and cache. > Tom ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:04:22 -0400 To: obc Ramblings Subject: OBC Website From: LAWRENCE TIPTON 4PM EST I=E2=99m unable to access the website on my desktop (iMac) or phone I cleared out the cache (I think) and removed History and Website data. ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:22:23 -0400 To: John Stamper Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! [1 Attachment] From: Steve Boy oh boy, that explains a lot ! Steve Sankner Sent from my iPad > On Oct 30, 2017, at 4:20 PM, John Stamper holidayandhobbies@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > [Attachment(s) from John Stamper included below] > > John Stamper >> On Oct 30, 2017, at 9:40 AM, Patrick Wattigny seventytwop@hotmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: >> Good morning all from Louisiana, >> Yes, I was there. I do not believe that the 13=E2=9312 game in the major leagues, particularly in the World Series, can be classified as a classic. I will grant that it was an epic game, with all sorts of drama, twist, and turns. Having watched the game in section 417 above home plate, I can tell you that the Home plate umpire in the game last night was horriblecalling balls and strikes. His zone was all over the place, and I believe contributed to Kershaw's frustrations early in the game. Give the Astros credit, they put the ball in play. But I do believe bad on parent behind the plate have a large measure to do with both teams' inability to get batters out. >> I'm pretty sure Dave Roberts mismanaged his pitching staff again last night. That seems to be a recurring theme in this series, although again, give the Astros credit, as their batters continue to get the job done no matter who is on the mound for Los Angeles. It was pretty amazing to be there, and I'm glad I was. The Saturday night game was good with its share of drama, twists, and turns. >> For the record, I left the game at 12:40 AM, then proceeded to drive to Lafayette, then to Hammond, Louisiana, and drop off my two college students who went to the game with me at their respective schools, then came home and gave the opening prayer for my high school, as it started a new week. LOL I did not pray for the Dodgers, though I should. Here's my take on what I think is going to happen the next two days. By all accounts, and by all logic, Verlander should win in convincing style. Given this World Series, I expect the exact contrary to happen, that the Dodgers will jump on him en route to a big win tomorrow. Then who knows what's going to happen in game seven! One sad thing about this World Series, it has it really has been an excellent series, that someone has to lose. I told my boys on Saturday evening, I expected a shoot out game, then a pitchers' duel. I got my game order reversed, as the pitchers' duel was Saturday (more or less), and last night was a shoot out by all aclaim. >> Go Dodgers, though I won't be surprised if Houston wins the World Series, >> Fr. Pat >> Sent from my iPad >> On Oct 30, 2017, at 8:54 AM, EEK originaleek1@att.net [OBC-Ramblings] >>> Awesome game. In fact this post season has given us one awesome game after another. How many freaking home runs have been hit? I do have a horse in this race for a few reasons. >>> Justin Verlander: it's great to see him prove a lot of "Tiger fans" wrong. Listening to the local sports talk shows would lead one to believe thatJV was over the hill and should have retired a couple years ago. >>> I will always pull for the AL team period! (Cleveland would really havetested my resolve.) >>> Altuve: An undertall stud to be sure. >>> The people of Houston deserve something to cheer about. >>> Lastly: Puig! >>> On Monday, October 30, 2017 2:47 AM, "'Sal Domino' ChicoD1@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings]" wrote: >>> Walk Shortly and Carry a Big Stick! >>> How about Altuve? I know my guts were turning. Same thing, no horse in the race but I sure want to see Houston get their first championship. So many ups and downs and potentially heart breaking moments. Springer=E2=99smisplay had my heart sink into my stomach. I think we will see Verlander pull a Shilling or Randy Johnson moment and just be the stud that he is. At least Houston knows what they will be doing this off season=E2=A6 searching for a bullpen! >>> Sal Domino >>> OBC - 1992 >>> https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ >>> From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] >>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 2:39 AM >>> To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>> Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! >>> Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I really know that hurt. >>> Everyone else: >>> Did you see that game? >>> i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watching a 1-0 gem. This was not that game. >>> This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corinwas already up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring, to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. >>> Thoughts? ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:38:38 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Web site back up, but we're still on the old servers... From: Wayne Delia Our OBC web site is back up and running. You can make updates to your want list or your personal information (stored on the database). We're still using the disk storage from Network Solutions, but that will only be for a short time while the paperwork gets processed dealing with transferring the registrar of "oldbaseball.com" from NS to our new hosting provider, I'll most likely make that cutover either very late tonight, or very late tomorrow night, to minimize taking down the website during important updates we might want to make. ================= Date: 30 Oct 2017 22:30:51 +0000 To: Subject: computer illiterate From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 19:05:22 -0400 To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] computer illiterate From: Ken M Richard,  Try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, go into your browser settings (sometimes there's a little gear icon) and empty the browser cache. If that STILL doesn't work, you'll need to contact someone who knows what they're talking about like Joe Isaac or Wayne Delia... but I think you should be able to fix it that way. Ken M Sent from my not so smart phone. http://kenmorganti.weebly.com ------ Original message------From: rlabs1@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] Date: Mon, Oct 30, 2017 6:30 PMTo: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com;Cc: Subject:[OBC-Ramblings] computer illiterate I clicked on an OBC link I have and the site came up as GATORHOST getting started page. What do I do?Help!! Richard Labs ================= Date: 30 Oct 2017 23:55:31 +0000 To: Subject: illiteracy turns into competency From: rlabs1@yahoo.com ================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:13:04 -0400 To: mikerw7@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: Joshua Levine Finally just recovered from that game...I loved it but was disappointed at the outcome. Games 6 and 7 will great! -----Original Message----- From: mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 11:39 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I reallyknow that hurt. Everyone else: Did you see that game? i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watchinga 1-0 gem. This was not that game. This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin wasalready up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring,to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. ================= To: Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:15:17 -0400 Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: "Sal Domino" What do you mean game 7? LOL=E2=A6 Sal Domino OBC - 1992 https://sites.google.com/site/chicod1wantlist/ From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joshua Levine Wite3@aol.com [OBC-Ramblings] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 11:13 PM To: mikerw7@gmail.com; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Finally just recovered from that game...I loved it but was disappointed at the outcome. Games 6 and 7 will great! -----Original Message----- From: mikerw7@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Sun, Oct 29, 2017 11:39 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! Okay, Geordie and Josh and our other Dodger fans, my condolences. I reallyknow that hurt. Everyone else: Did you see that game? i love baseball--I'm remembering this year how much I love baseball as I pass on my love for this sport to my son. I also enjoy pitching duels. Unlike some (cough, cough) I can sit on the edge of my seat for 3 hours watchinga 1-0 gem. This was not that game. This was insane. My daughter, who watched with me until the end (Corin wasalready up an hour past bedtime when my wife finally called it for him), said this was the game for those who dislike baseball or think it's boring,to see just how exciting it can be. Wow. It was thrilling! My heart was pounding and I don't even have a horse in this race. ================= Date: 31 Oct 2017 03:55:30 +0000 To: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] THAT GAME! From: mikerw7@gmail.com ================= Date: 31 Oct 2017 06:47:22 +0000 To: Subject: test From: raymondluurs@gmail.com ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 06:45:05 -0400 To: obc Ramblings Subject: re: OBC Website From: LAWRENCE TIPTON I was able to access our website this AM and everything appears to be normal! Thanks Wayne, Joe, and anyone else who volunteers their time to keep it up and running. I was able to update my wantlist and knock off 37 hits what were these hitsGuru? (1) 1954 Parkhurst wrestling with bio back COMPLETED SET! (13) 1954 Parkhurst wrestling with =E2=9CLucky Premium=E2=9D backs. (19) 1967 Topps =E2=9CWho Am I=E2=9D via COMC with disguise although scratched (1) 1950s exhibit wrestling card (3) 1960 Bell Brand Dodgers ================= To: Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:13:16 -0500 Subject: website progressing, I think From: "George Vrechek" I see my wantlist online and I can access some of the pages, but the home page address gets me to HostGator Web startup page. Does anyone know, do I need to do anything or will it all come back eventually? George Vrechek ================= To: Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:55:59 -0500 Subject: Website From: "George Vrechek" Thanks for the responses. I use both Chrome and Internet Explorer. After clearing cache, downloads and cookies (I think) on both, I can get to the home page on Chrome, but not the Directory. On Internet Explorer, I can't get to either. It just lands me on the Gator page. I have rebooted. Still scratching my head. ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:00:45 -0400 To: George Vrechek Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website From: Bob Donaldson Maybe clear your DNS cache https://support.opendns.com/hc/en-us/articles/227988627-How-to-clear-the-DNS-Cache-on-a-computer-and-web-browsers- On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:55 AM, 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Thanks for the responses. I use both Chrome and Internet Explorer. After > clearing cache, downloads and cookies (I think) on both, I can get to the > home page on Chrome, but not the Directory. On Internet Explorer, I can=E2=99t > get to either. It just lands me on the Gator page. I have rebooted. Still > scratching my head. > George ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 10:46:26 -0500 To: Bob Donaldson , George Vrechek Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website From: mzentko ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:51:00 -0700 To: Geno Wagner Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] website progressing, I think From: Geordie Calvert George, trying clearing your cache and history for the last month. That worked for Mark Z. > On Oct 31, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Geno Wagner illini_grad_90@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] wrote: > Did you clear your cache and browser history? That seems to be working for most people. > Take Care, > Geno > From: "'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings]" > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 8:13 AM > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] website progressing, I think > I see my wantlist online and I can access some of the pages, but the homepage address gets me to HostGator Web startup page. Does anyone know, do Ineed to do anything or will it all come back eventually? > George Vrechek ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 10:53:17 -0600 To: mzentko Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website From: Marshall West Marshall West here. I can=E2=99t call up the OBC website anymore. Tried to clear with DNS instructions with no luck. Always get the GATOR screen. It=E2=99s not the end of the world. Just please advise if someone =E2=9Cbreaks the code=E2=9D, and the OBC website returns. > On Oct 31, 2017, at 9:46 AM, mzentko mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > On chrome last night I cleared cache for 1 week, no luck. So I cleared for 1 month and it worked for me > Fyi > Mark Z > Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device > -------- Original message -------- > From: "Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" > > Date: 10/31/2017 10:00 AM (GMT-06:00) > To: George Vrechek > > Cc: OBC Ramblings > > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website > Maybe clear your DNS cache > https://support.opendns.com/hc/en-us/articles/227988627-How-to-clear-the-DNS-Cache-on-a-computer-and-web-browsers- Bob > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:55 AM, 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: > Thanks for the responses. I use both Chrome and Internet Explorer. After clearing cache, downloads and cookies (I think) on both, I can get to the home page on Chrome, but not the Directory. On Internet Explorer, I can=E2=99t get to either. It just lands me on the Gator page. I have rebooted.Still scratching my head. > George ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:20:32 -0600 To: mzentko Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website From: Marshall West Marshall West again. I went to Google, and then entered =E2=9Coldbaseball.com=E2=9D. The OBC website showed up (but lost the opening left-handside bar information). I=E2=99m OK with how it works now. > On Oct 31, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Marshall West wrote: > Marshall West here. I can=E2=99t call up the OBC website anymore. Tried to clear with DNS instructions with no luck. Always get the GATOR screen. > It=E2=99s not the end of the world. Just please advise if someone =E2=9Cbreaks the code=E2=9D, and the OBC website returns. > Thanks, > Marshall >> On Oct 31, 2017, at 9:46 AM, mzentko mzentko@yahoo.com [OBC-Ramblings] > >> On chrome last night I cleared cache for 1 week, no luck. So I cleared for 1 month and it worked for me >> Fyi >> Mark Z >> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: "Bob Donaldson obcbobd@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings]" > >> Date: 10/31/2017 10:00 AM (GMT-06:00) >> To: George Vrechek > >> Cc: OBC Ramblings > >> Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Website >> Maybe clear your DNS cache >> https://support.opendns.com/hc/en-us/articles/227988627-How-to-clear-the-DNS-Cache-on-a-computer-and-web-browsers- > Bob >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:55 AM, 'George Vrechek' vrechek@ameritech.net [OBC-Ramblings] > wrote: >> Thanks for the responses. I use both Chrome and Internet Explorer. Afterclearing cache, downloads and cookies (I think) on both, I can get to the home page on Chrome, but not the Directory. On Internet Explorer, I can=E2=99t get to either. It just lands me on the Gator page. I have rebooted.Still scratching my head. >> George ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 14:52:48 -0400 To: OBC Ramblings Subject: Cutover planned for OBC website after tonight's WS game From: Wayne Delia Very late tonight, I will be changing the entries in the DNS name servers to point our OBC website to the new hosting service. All the content has been copied over, and the database has been loaded. I'll need to refresh the database and also copy over the wantlists directory to minimize or eliminate the chance of losing any recent changes I'd like to be able to say this will be seamless and transparent, but most likely there will be a couple of unusual quirks. For example, I may overlook some config files which possibly contain old obsolete server names, accounts, or passwords. Those kinds of problems can be fixed relatively easily and quickly. After a couple of hours finishing up my seasonal, part-time tax collecting gig for Arlington High School. I'll be back to full-time retirement (and I am really looking forward to it!) so if any problems crop up in the near future, I'll be reasonably available to get things back on track. ================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:48:27 -0400 To: wayne.m.delia@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Cutover planned for OBC website after tonight's From: mikesportsfan@aol.com On behalf of all OBC, THANK YOU for all your efforts! -----Original Message----- From: Wayne Delia wayne.m.delia@gmail.com [OBC-Ramblings] To: OBC Ramblings Sent: Tue, Oct 31, 2017 2:52 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Cutover planned for OBC website after tonight's WSgame Very late tonight, I will be changing the entries in the DNS name servers to point our OBC website to the new hosting service. All the content has been copied over, and the database has been loaded. I'll need to refresh the database and also copy over the wantlists directory to minimize or eliminatethe chance of losing any recent changes I'd like to be able to say this will be seamless and transparent, but most likely there will be a couple of unusual quirks. For example, I may overlook some config files which possibly contain old obsolete server names, accounts, or passwords. Those kinds of problems can be fixed relatively easily and After a couple of hours finishing up my seasonal, part-time tax collecting gig for Arlington High School. I'll be back to full-time retirement (and I am really looking forward to it!) so if any problems crop up in the near future, I'll be reasonably available to get things back on track. ================= Date: 31 Oct 2017 22:41:07 +0000 To: Subject: Halloween Waivers From: tvalacak@comcast.net