Is this passing off a replica trooper helmet as original?

[vaderdarth]

To truly understand the true story here........you have to understand how Gino operates. Time and time and time again, A deal is born between Gino and someone else......doesn't matter who...........anyone will do. Then for whatever reason, the deal starts looking shady on the other guy's part because Gino likes to change the terms of the deal after the fact. Obviously the deal is gonna go south and it makes Gino royally pissed that he won't get what he wants and so he begins to act like a scorned mistress and takes his revenge out on the guy that wants to get the hell out of any dealing with him. His revenge is usually in the form of creating some bull crap scam about that individual because he's angry at them. He doesn't need proof, he doesn't need evidence........he just has to make the baseless accusation and then his "buddies" come crawling out from under the same rock to help burn his victim at the stake. Does this same ******* story not ring any bells with anyone besides me??? I know there has to be some RPF veterans besides myself that has watched this same story unfold over and over only changing the name of the victim each time.

I don't recall this forum ever electing the likes of Gino as our spokesman for Truth and Verification, mainly because alot of us have dealt with him personally in the past and know his "ethics" don't really reflect that of the rest of the forum's.

I'm personally tired of Gino bypassing the moderation staff altogether and instead of presenting his concerns to them, decides to harrass his victims publicly.

Gino, why don't you go back to your happy little forum where your "rule" is widely accepted and stop trying to "rule" our forum. I'm frankly suprised that the very last forum you are associated with hasn't lowered the boom on you for your incessant crap!
Come to think of it, I'll be suprised if you don't end up banning yourself on your own forum just so you can show your "muscle".

Being an original RPF member, I don't care what your opinion is about, well pretty much anything unless you have some proof to back up your claim. So put up or shut up. If you can't put up, you owe the membership of this forum an apology for such an incredible waste of time. Get this thru your shiny head........we don't care that another of your "deals" has fallen thru. It's certainly no big suprise that noone wants to get royally screwed by you now is it????

 

[defstartrooper]

I think you are confusing what I am saying. Yes, there are striking similarities between the two issues, but what I see is people linking them together due to the similarities and negating Gino's concerns because Thomas was proved wrong in the last thread. What happened in that thread has nothing to do with the authenticity of this helmet. That is where I have an issue. People are dismissing it because they don't like Gino on a personal level instead of because anything he has posted. I think there is a good chance this is a production made piece, but I don't think there is any harm at all in proving it.

Do I think Gino has personal issues with Joe? I don't doubt it for a second. Do I think Gino is doing this solely to defame Joe? Ehhh... not as sure of it as the rest of you seem to be. I have known Gino for years and from friends, to enemies, to perfect strangers, I have seen Gino make efforts to authenticate real prop pieces. I believe this is another of those efforts. Do I think Gino has the smoking gun he thinks he has? No. Do I think Joe could pretty easily bring this whole issue to a close with a few images? Yes, I do. Why he didn't do it 100 posts ago is beyond me.

Thomas wasn't proved wrong by any evidence Gino presented though was he ? only by the lack of evidence that Thomas had to make his claims.
So in truth Thomas wasn't proved wrong he just couldn't prove he was right.
I can't speak for anyone else but i'm not dismissing Ginos claim based on the other thread, Gino may well be right but i think it's poor form to call someone out with no evidence to back the claim up and that is the only reason i mentioned the other thread at all personally.
Gino could also have dismissed the claims Thomas made with some decent hi rez shots but he didn't did he no instead he let the claims die a natural death because Thomas had no evidence to the contrary.
And everyone was happy to continue to blindly believe Gino without seeing evidence his stuff was authentic.

Gino hasn't posted any evidence to show Joe is lying has he ? or did i miss it ?

 

[troopermaster]

Joe doesn't have to show anyone anything. If Gino thinks that the helmet is a replica then it is up him to show proof to back up his claims. If I had an original 'anything' and someone called me out, then I would make them proove that is what not I said it was. If Joe starts showing the world all these 'tells' then anyone can try and pass off replicas as originals.

I think that Gino doesn't like the fact that Joe has something he has, and that is moulds that touched the inside of an original helmet, something that until now, no-one else could make that claim. I am happy to hear that Joe never got involved with Gino with the helmet moulding because I am sure the helmet or moulds would have been damaged or altered so that only Gino could have 'the most accurate replicas'.

Why don't you show us what we should be seeing Gino and if Joe decides to show us anything, then it's up to him. If you know the tells, lay them out for us all to see or shut the hell up!

 

[SithLord]

I agree with the intent of GINO's thread here. If someone comes out saying "Mine is screen used!", then he or she should expect to be called out on it. Are we supposed to blindly accept these things as holy writ because someone says so? I mean GINO's pieces have had some pretty good pics taken to back up his claims, especially when he offered up those three trooper helmets.
How many times have people been duped into buying so called "screen used" pieces? If I were offering what I thought was a screen used piece, I would post some side by side comparisons and state why I thought so and so was screen used.

Funny, this is what you said when I questioned the authenticity of Gino's ANH Vader helmet, claiming it was either cast directly from the original or taken from original production molds:

Thomas, GINO is happy with his pieces and the provenance. You never will be as happy with it. He is not offering up his pieces to anyone, save for the visual. So, knowing that GINO will not bother giving you any evidence, why even start this thread, if not to bait him into a discussion? Even Mac has given you the same lectures on your "photographic analysis". You don't have access to either an original OR a GINO, so why bother with this? Be happy with your SL and your short tusk tubed TD and be done with it.

Joe is not offering pieces to anyone.

Gino does not have access to an original or to Joe's helmet.

So why should Gino bother with this?

He should be happy with his helmets and be done with it.

Without participants from the Pro-GINO and Anti-GINO sides, this thread would have died right off, Mac. As much as you disagree with Thomas, you are FAR more Anti-GINO. I am trying to remain impartial, but frankly, you guys have been wont to dogpile on GINO since his thread about his own forum.

Again, usually these helmets become debated when parties are offering runs. As GINO is doing no such thing, either above or below boards as far as I know, then this whole exercise is pointless. This is yet another Anti-GINO thread. Nothing more.

And you are pro-Gino, not impartial, based on your statements here and your statements in my thread.

So? This exercise here should be pointless to you since there is no run of this ROTJ helmet. So this must be an anti-Joe thread, nothing more.

This thread is still meant for baiting Thomas. You have nothing to prove by starting this in the first place. This is merely attacking a member's claims. The attack and claims are both pointless...again, he is happy with what he has, you are not.

And Gino is merely attacking a member's claims. Joe is happy with what he has, Gino is not.

I guess I can say these things the same way you can...without having his helmet in your hands, right? So, it's okay for you to say that his helmet lacks the provenance without actually handling it but not for anyone else to call you to task for it?

And so it is ok for Gino to call Joe to task for a helmet by saying it lacks provenance without actually handling it? You called me to task for calling out Gino, but you do not call Gino to task for calling out Joe. That is not impartial as you claim to be.

People consider it baiting because it is entirely one sided. The guy has stated numerous times that he has no desire to enter into any discussion with you about his pieces. This is not new news, yet you tried anyway. You don't have either pieces to offer up an informed and educated discourse over either claim. You lack a GINO helmet and you lack the helmet, or mold, his helmet was descended from, so what did you hope to prove...really?

Joe has stated numerous times that he has no desire to enter into a discussion with Gino about this helmet. Gino doesn't have the helmet in hand to offer up an informed an educated discourse over the claim. He lacks a Joe helmet and so what does he have to prove....really?

So? How is what Gino doing here any different than what I did when I questioned his claim about his ANH Vader helmet? I can feed you back exactly what you said to me in my thread and we'll see who is impartial and who is not. Everything you said in my thread completely contradicts your statements above.

 

[SithLord]

Ehhh... we have seen a lot more focused personal attacks than this go unmitigated. Right or wrong, Gino appears to have a legit concern here, so why should it be put to rest and everyone just blindly accept what has been posted as fact with nothing to back it up? If there is a question about authenticity, you would rather see the thread locked for... what reason?

When I questioned the authenticity of Gino's ANH Vader helmet, the thread I started was locked up. So then I had a legitimate concern as well. Why should we accept blindly what Gino claims?

 

[SithLord]

Gotcha. So since people have personal issues with Gino, that should negate the concerns he brought up. Might as well just go ahead and ban him if anything he posts is going to be beat down because of some unrelated thread... and not on the merits or questions raised here.

That so-called "unrelated thread" is exactly what Gino did to me when I questioned his claims. You can't have it both way, Braks. Regardless of what people think my "personal issues" might be with Gino, if I see a claim that isn't founded I will argue it, and that is no different from what Gino is doing here.

 

[ghostryder]

My apologies in advance if my memory is bad, was Gino the one who knows the accurate tie-pilot hose but wouldn't share the info with the rpf?

 

[SithLord]

I think you are confusing what I am saying. Yes, there are striking similarities between the two issues, but what I see is people linking them together due to the similarities and negating Gino's concerns because Thomas was proved wrong in the last thread. What happened in that thread has nothing to do with the authenticity of this helmet. That is where I have an issue. People are dismissing it because they don't like Gino on a personal level instead of because anything he has posted. I think there is a good chance this is a production made piece, but I don't think there is any harm at all in proving it.

Someone posted a comparison of Gino's helmet next to the VP.....the VP is not original nor even has all the details of one. Before I could go into that, the thread was locked without warning. It has nothing to do with not liking Gino, it has everything to do with addressing claims of authenticity or provenance. So to say that what happened in my thread has nothing to do with the authenticity of this helmet isn't the point.

 

[synasp]

The horse is dead. May it rest in peace.