Houdiniguy selling Mike Tait recasts on ebay

[Stu Pidasso]

It puts the lotion on the skin!

 

[JMChladek]

For Gallo to be a total alias and creation, Mike Tait would have to have enough basic talent, creativity and business ability to generate a decent reputation for himself, which seems at odds with his track record.

OTOH, he did manage to worm his way back in at RI a few months ago despite deep scepticism on the part of many members. He talked a good fight in order to achieve that. Tom's recent NT pipe defence was also pretty plausible. Is that a link? No, but it means we should be more careful and less trusting - at face value it seems like Tom is going to have to work a lot harder to clear himself this time.

I've never done business with either gent, but with X-wings coming into the mix that's something I needed to know about. Thanks (and commiserations) to the OP.

The thing is though if somebody was a con man and the usual tricks didn't work anymore, that can be the impetus to try a different approach. I've seen similar things happen with some individuals in the SF modeling circles I've been involved with for the past 13 years or so. If the intent is to fool and get a payment for something through false pretenses, be it vapor ware (vapor kit in these cases) or try and pass off something that was recasted without coming clean on the source, then when the normal channels don't work, one can resort to getting sneakier. Considering the downturn in the economy where the normal clients dry up or are getting smarter about where they spend their money, the sneaky factor can go up.

 

[Megamicrofish]

Like Mic said, he has been redeemed twice already. However, this time seems a bit shadier.

Well in my opinion he was only "redeemed" because his explanation was plausable but no evidence was given.

 

[Darkknight0667]

Okay, I feel this all smells fishy, especially with the label. That said, what part of the CoC exactly did Houdiniguy violate here? None of the sales were made here. I am not condoning dealing with recasters, but let's be objective here and have it hashed out where the violation came in. So far, what I see is Houdiniguy has been mum about this whole thing. That is crappy, but having him banned, even a temp ban, doesn't exactly leave him many options.

Like Mic said, he has been redeemed twice already. However, this time seems a bit shadier.

Damned good question, Qui Gonzalez. :thumbsup

What offense did Houdiniguy commit on the RPF board? If he is shilling for Mike Tait, he's done so on ebay, not on the RPF. Poor judgement? If it's true, then yes, and he's screwed his reputation here. But where in the CoC is off board behavior regulated? If it isn't, and no violation of the CoC can be pointed to, then this temp ban should probably be lifted.

 

[EvilRocketeer]

Damned good question, Qui Gonzalez. :thumbsup

What offense did Houdiniguy commit on the RPF board? If he is shilling for Mike Tait, he's done so on ebay, not on the RPF. Poor judgement? If it's true, then yes, and he's screwed his reputation here. But where in the CoC is off board behavior regulated? If it isn't, and no violation of the CoC can be pointed to, then this temp ban should probably be lifted.

Well, it does effect our members..Relicmaker had his pipe recasted by mike t. and sold by houdiniguy...Plus, the x-wing was sold to a rpf member.

I understand where you guys are coming from, but at the same time should we lift the ban on xtremecreations? He was banned for recasting, but that was off board too. He didnt recast anything on th rpf or try selling them on the rpf. He was a member for a few days before he got the boot for being a known recaster..It doesnt make sense..If we cant trust the members then why have them around? what happens if mike t..recasted one of your items then tom sells on ebay? would you be upset then? would you want him banned?

 

[morganthirteen]

we do not feel comfortable allowing him the ability to use this resource given the overwhelming evidence of him shilling for a banned member.

I'm confused. That sentence implies that Houdiniguy has been banned not for anything related to recasting, but rather for associating with a banned member outside the forum.

That's a slippery slope if there ever was one. I'm very close friends with (at least) two banned members. Am I now at risk of being banned for those friendships?

If this forum's CoC is now extended beyond the actual forum I think that's a legitimate question, and one for concern. It boils down to this:

Do your off-board relationships affect now your RPF standing?

Shawn

 

[micdavis]

I think the next person to use the word "recasted" should be banned from the conversation. :lol

 

[Amish Trooper]

I think the next person to use the word "recasted" should be banned from the conversation. :lol

And I will start an apology thread for stated banning

 

[thegreatgalling]

Then I will fail to do a simple search and ALSO start an apology thread about the same issue.

 

[rollerboi]

I'm confused. That sentence implies that Houdiniguy has been banned not for anything related to recasting, but rather for associating with a banned member outside the forum.

That's a slippery slope if there ever was one. I'm very close friends with (at least) two banned members. Am I now at risk of being banned for those friendships?

You must have missed the definition of the word shill. This goes beyond simple friendship. If you attempt to sell, endorse, or otherwise promote products created or recasted :lol from your two friends, then yeah - you would be shilling for them and should be banned. Otherwise, no - that's silly.

In this case, the evidence indicates business arrangements, sales and shipping, linked between the two in such a way that there is a strong argument for shilling. I hope Tom gets back on soon to explain his side, and note that the mods have tried several avenues of contacting him. Once he returns their contacts he will be unbanned and given an opportunity to respond, I am sure.

Until then, there are things on this board that Mike T. should not be privy to, and it's a safe and reasonable course of action to temporarily suspend Tom until he is able to clarify and restore faith in himself.

 

[morganthirteen]

You must have missed the definition of the word shill.

Not at all, though it's perfectly clear that you certainly don't understand the definition of "slippery slope".

Your argument seems to be that certain forms of illegal activity are acceptable here on the RPF while others are not, and that the RPF now has the power to define behavior (and apparently punish) members of the forum for other activity *away* from the board.

"Slippery slope".

Look it up.

Scratch that. Let me help you:

slippery slope: Definition from Answers.com

This forum is quite frankly fraught with all manner of legal/moral perils. I would think it's enough to try and manage them without reaching outside of it's borders.

 

[Art Andrews]

But where in the CoC is off board behavior regulated? If it isn't, and no violation of the CoC can be pointed to, then this temp ban should probably be lifted.

Clearly you need to reread the MGL.

Per the MGL:

"Please note that your actions outside the confines of the site may affect your membership."

 

[Darkknight0667]

Until then, there are things on this board that Mike T. should not be privy to, and it's a safe and reasonable course of action to temporarily suspend Tom until he is able to clarify and restore faith in himself.

Ummm . . . as a public forum (where non-members can read everything except the OT area), what "things on this board" are being kept from Mike because of Tom's ban? What is he now NOT privy to?

 

[morganthirteen]

Clearly you need to reread the MGL.

Per the MGL:

"Please note that your actions outside the confines of the site may affect your membership."

Art, you have to admit that's a very broad area open to interpretation. What actions? Actions that relate soley to the hobby? Or does that include your personal life as well?

Based on your answer, Rollerboi's answer in regard to my concern with his comment of:

Otherwise, no - that's silly

- isn't that silly at all.

 

[feek61]

I for one think the policy of the RPF is right. As always the choice to allow someone on a forum is always a judgment call. If a member here is selling recast on ebay but not here he should absolutely be banned from here. Am I missing the point someplace?

 

[Contec]

Art, you have to admit that's a very broad area open to interpretation. What actions? Actions that relate soley to the hobby? Or does that include your personal life as well?

Based on your answer, Rollerboi's answer in regard to my concern with his comment of:

- isn't that silly at all.

They did bann that Pedofile a few years ago, and i guess that can be attached to his " Personal life" and not his "hobby". I however don't remember if he had done anything "bad" on the forum aswell.

 

[morganthirteen]

If a member here is selling recast on ebay but not here he should absolutely be banned from here. Am I missing the point someplace?

Yes, I think so. Look at this again:

"Please note that your actions outside the confines of the site may affect your membership."

That line doesn't refer to *just* recasting. In fact, it's entirely open-ended in that it makes no distinction between someone's actions as they may relate to the hobby or their actions outside of it.

See where I'm coming from?

 

[Darkknight0667]

They did ban that Pedophile a few years ago, and i guess that can be attached to his " Personal life" and not his "hobby". I however don't remember if he had done anything "bad" on the forum as well.

If you're talking about Raz, he was banned from the board because of his legendary on-board fights with another (now) banned member, not because of his criminal acts (which happened after his banning).

 

[FANTAMATION]

If Houdiniguy is helping this re-caster crook in any way, shape or form then he's just as guilty! It shouldn't matter whether it takes place here or on eBay, do we want people who participate in these activities as members? If you don't ban then isn't that kinda saying what they're doing is ok? Is this the ol' "it's ok, just not in my backyard?

 

[morganthirteen]

If Houdiniguy is helping this re-caster crook in any way, shape or form then he's just as guilty! It shouldn't matter whether it takes place here or on eBay, do we want people who participate in these activities as members? If you don't ban then isn't that kinda saying what they're doing is ok? Is this the ol' "it's ok, just not in my backyard?

What part of this do you not understand? I assume you're reading *all* the posts? If so, please take the time to not just look at the words, but to try to read and comprehend them.

"Please note that your actions outside the confines of the site may affect your membership."

According to the way that rule is written, the RPF has the right to ban you if you do something outside of the forum that it doesn't approve of. For example: Do you have a DUI? Have you ever gotten caught with a prostitute, or cheated on your wife?

If so, you can be banned for those actions, according to that rule.

Now, if you're comfortable with that, fine. You're certainly entitled to feel that way, but please recognize and respect that others may not agree with your point of view.

do we want people who participate in these activities as members?

People like who? The ones who participate in IP theft? Oh, wait. lol

Sir, I respectfully suggest that you remove yourself from this debate for your own good.

Sincerely,

Shawn Morgan, IP thief.