Chris Nerat Still Stinging From GUU Thrashing...

[skipcareyisfat]

actually i don't think we'll have to agree to disagree at all scf,

Sorry, I should've been more clear. I was referring to Chris's definition of appropriate, not yours Robert.

Skipcareyisfat- Is the quote in your signature about Lampson?

Yep, courtesy of Chris. I finally tracked down a couple Tommy Thevenow home run balls so that quest is now complete. And let me tell ya, the provenance on those bad boys is rock solid.

I said it earlier, but I'll say it again, I don't dislike Chris Nerat either. All these exchanges have been quite entertaining and not all that uncivil, I think. He and I had an enjoyable and spirited conversation right after he posted the "Coward" blog. I wanted to clear up his misinterpretation of my comment he quoted about Heritage keeping the Namath helmet even without the SB3 connection. He took it to mean that I was saying Heritage would sell it regardless of the authenticity. What I explained was that I expected Heritage to keep it around assuming it was deemed authentic, but not as a SB3 helmet. He quickly offered to correct it on the blog and I told him not to worry about it.

Personally, I have nothing against Chris or Bloedow or O'Connell or Brian Earnest. All decent guys I believe. But, just as Chris stands by what he wrote, I stand by my beliefs that Lampson must have the greatest sales pitch known to man; Chris's initial comments weren't all that well thought out; and Coach's Corner has SCD by the ballocks.

[both-teams-played-hard]

"The knowledge that this guy has in his head, some of you would never be able to comprehend."

The Cliff's notes version:
"He's done forgot more than you'll ever learn."

And to all the posters who don't post anymore because of posts like this: This is what we in the business call the "pile-on". Although, good-spirited with NO bad feelings.

[aeneas01]

If your suggestion is that he let it go, I would agree. My hope is that many of us soon come to the conclusion that we might all benefit from that advice.

not my suggestion at all - just pointing out that the exchange is obviously still fresh on nerat's mind given that he continues to write about it, as recently as yesterday. then again it's not like he has anything better to write about - apparently there were no guided tours on this trip. heck, nerat is probably keeping this thing going intentionally - between the two prior blogs regarding this topic he racked up 15 comments. i believe this might be a record for cricketsville, i mean gavel chat....

[earlywynnfan]

I must be reading all of this wrongly. I felt that Nerat's comments were worded poorly, but I understood what I felt he meant: that too many on this forum like to sit and point fingers -- sometimes educated, well-intentioned fingers, sure -- from behind the keyboard. But he was pointing out the fact that all the Lampson haters out there don't seem to show their faces in public. I think he has a point!! I was at the National, too, and I saw nobody approach him. (Why didn't I? Because I own nothing he's looked at, and don't collect jerseys or anything else he looks at, so I don't feel I have any right to question him.) CAN ANYONE ARGUE THIS??

Secondly, he posted that very few of you will even back up your comments about him with a phone call. Is this true??

In fact, I'd love to hear from you:
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE CALLED NERAT, OR SPOKEN TO HIM IN PERSON ABOUT ANY OF THIS?

I have! I agree with many of you about the faults at SCD, and I talked to him about them. We agreed some, we disagreed some, we both shared our views and reasons, like adults. I came out of the conversation with some understanding of him. Why don't more of you give the man the courtesy of a phone call? I tell you what, no matter how right you are, hiding behind a keyboard and screenname is gutless.

During our conversation, Nerat actually mentioned 3 of you: Aeneas, Suave, and Kingjammy. He told me that he really respected all of you, that you all come across as knowledgeable, dedicated, and honest. Yet, he said that none of you will call him! He also said that he felt aeneas did a great job uncovering the whole helmet issue, and did the community a great service, but feels that aeneas thinks he was talking about him negatively in his blog, which was not the intent (and I believed him.)

Kingjammy: Is it true you have not and will not call Nerat? If so, I find that really disappointing. I've read your posts for years now, and have always found you articulate, honest, and fair. Yet, for weeks now you've bashed Nerat repeatedly. This doesn't fit you.

Otismalibu: Someone else whose posts I've enjoyed; You said "yeah, he seems like a rock solid kind of guy." Based on the tone, it sounds like you're talking about Nerat and it comes across like sarcasm. If you did NOT intend sarcasm, I apologize, but if you DID, I have to ask: Have you ever talked to him, to make such a comment in public? Are YOU being fair?


I guess the reason for my post is because I think many of you seem to be handling this in a petty way. Talk to the man, THEN disagree with him. Did he make some comments that he'd like to take back? Probably, but I think he also intended to hit some right between the eyes, and I also think he did that.


Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com

[kingjammy24]

hi ken

"too many on this forum like to sit and point fingers..from behind the keyboard...he was pointing out the fact that all the Lampson haters out there don't seem to show their faces in public. I think he has a point!! ..CAN ANYONE ARGUE THIS??"

as others have said, i don't think it was much of a point to suggest that if you disagree with lampson then you ought to spend hundreds and take time off work to confront him publically. wouldn't it have been a better use of nerat's time to explain why lampson is the only notable figure in this industry who cannot be contacted by phone or email?

anyway, my beef wasn't so much with what chris said per se, but rather that, coming from him, it was hypocritical. he talks about confronting people and what's bad for the hobby when he himself deliberately looks the other way at some of the hobby's worst ills. if he advocates confronting people mano a mano, why doesn't he ever confront his pals over their ridiculous errors? if chris is a kept man, then that's fine. we all have to eat sh*t every now and then until we win the lottery. however in that case he ought not then turn around and act as if he's been diligent and upstanding himself. whether anyone can argue chris' points wasn't my issue. it's where they were coming from.

"Is it true you have not and will not call Nerat?"

ken, nerat issued his statements publically. in an SCD article no less. he now wants to take it offline? if chris had the cojones to publically call people cowards, then ought he not have the cojones to respond publically as well? you feel some are hiding behind their keyboards, but isn't nerat hiding behind a phone, trying to bury this debacle by taking it private? i simply kept the discussion on the same format that he began it. i won't call nerat because i don't want the conversation hidden from public view. there's nothing i have to hide so why take it to a private conversation? shouldn't everyone be privy to his comments? plus, at this point, i don't have much more to say on the matter.

"I think he also intended to hit some right between the eyes"

unfortunately, chris doesn't have that luxury. deliberately and selectively ignoring major hobby issues have cost nerat what credibility he may have had. he can't pretend to play "hard hitting journalist" half the time and then hide that hat when it involves one of his industry pals. if he wants to hit some folks right between the eyes, then let him start with lampson, AMI, mastro, and coach's corner. woops, there goes the hard-hitting journalist act huh? sorry but chris nerat has made it very hard to take chris nerat seriously.

none of this isn't to say that he may very well be a nice guy. i just find most of his and bloedow's articles to be bereft of cogent thought and seem to have a biased and hidden agenda behind them.

rudy.

[otismalibu]

Otismalibu: Someone else whose posts I've enjoyed; You said "yeah, he seems like a rock solid kind of guy." Based on the tone, it sounds like you're talking about Nerat and it comes across like sarcasm. If you did NOT intend sarcasm, I apologize, but if you DID, I have to ask: Have you ever talked to him, to make such a comment in public? Are YOU being fair?

As BTPH stated, it was just an example of piling on...referencing his phrase, which has been done repeatedly over the last few days. A friendly jab ya know, like calling someone a coward.

So many of the beefs between the auctions houses and this board come down to them simply saying something is good, then someone here doing research and coming up with some photographic evidence that it's not as advertised. The keepers of the flame used to be able to simply give a thumbs up and that was all there was to it. Now, with this pesky internet, visual evidence is easily accessed and shared. That often leads to items looking less than 'rock solid'.