CGC Employee's Astroturfing E4

[cman]

@anon92205803

@cman

I’m not saying that Charlie should disavow them at this moment, in fact I don’t think it would be fair to bash any party right now since we don’t know much. However, I do think that it depends on how much CGC knew about this and how CGC decides to respond to this, as astroturfing is poor company practice and should be immediately addressed, especially since E4 is particularly influential for all-things Pokemon TCG (grading, etc.). Essentially, I’m saying that I’m curious to see how Charlie acts when CGC responds and we’ll go from there. This is important because Charlie carries influence in the Pokemon community.

I have been on these forums for years and appreciate all that Charlie has done for the community. I also recognize the fact that CGC is a valid grading company. However, I’m putting the two aside for this matter, as this is an issue of company practices/culture.

At this time, the mods have concluded the conversation with CGC in private. There will not be a public statement from them on the forum.

I want to clarify that this is not a large-scale conspiracy to influence opinions on E4. We found that CGC had more than one account and that the accounts were publicly interacting with each other in a way that wasn’t transparent, and we made the decision to delete the accounts. No one should expect any further actions by any party.

I also ask that people respect Charlie’s position as someone who is just an outside contractor for CGC. He is not employed by them (he is also not employed by E4- mods are volunteers). He is not in a position to comment for CGC and he obviously wasn’t even aware of these posts. Messaging him and speculating about him openly won’t get you any more answers.

Thank you for providing an update on this. I appreciate it, although no response does signify a response on their part. While it’s not a large-scale conspiracy, most of us know that E4 is very influential in the realm of pokemon (just look at XY evolutions booster box prices/supply as a result of this thread bringing to light the low pop of PSA 10 holos).

I know that I’m going against the grain here, especially with more established E4 members. I have nothing but respect for Charlie, and my original post was not to go after him, but to caveat what @fourthstartcg said. Being financially tied to CGC equates to having “skin in the game” and inevitably aligns Charlie with CGC (and by extension, it even ties E4 with CGC, but that association is much weaker, and to be clear, E4 has no direct/financial ties to CGC). This is not a bad thing at all, but it does affiliate him with the company in peoples’ minds, no matter how much you attempt to sever the two (which is why a statement from CGC would’ve been nice if they truly wanted to absolve this issue, although it’s probably small for them since the TCG base spans more than just pokemon collectors).

Honestly, all of the grading companies have their own issues. This is just the most recent issue for a company and one in which a member has a tie to the company.

I really am not trying to throw Charlie under the bus here, but rather say that it’s too early to say anything about the situation and that despite being an outside contractor, he still has affiliations with CGC as a company. I don’t even feel comfortable continuing this conversation because Charlie himself hasn’t said anything yet (I also recognize that Charlie may be contractually obligated not to discuss CGC and respect that as well).