Should a Newbie Post?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>You guys and gals are right, I'm a newbie and I've been throwing my weight around. However, it's not intentional. To show good faith, I'll put it to a vote. If people want me to post less often, I will. So here's your chance to limit my posts if you want to. I will go with the majority. Actually I'm not that new, just stubborn and hardheaded. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>Not so much the quantity, I would think, Peter, but the quality.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycle</b><p>Your posting is fine. Some consider some of your questions light in weight ("Would you collect as many cards if they were called mards? How about if they were called flards?"), but there's nothing offensive and you pose some fair questions and points. For example, you asked what was the first true color baseball card. That was an interesting question that had not been asked asked or discussed before.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>Yes a newbie should post, and shouldn't be discouraged to post. I agree with the quality vs. quantity of posting however.<br /><br />I'm a newbie myself (8 months or so), and I mainly lurk on the main board, but sometimes I'll weigh in.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p> Instead of starting one after another, perhaps you may try to participate in Others' ongoing threads. Yours, although *funny, sometimes distracts and reduces participation in those pertinent threads and they become exiled to "page 2". <br /><br />*I do enjoy most of 'em.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ed Ivey</b><p>Keep posting Peter. People have the choice to open or skip any thread. I enjoy your threads. I get the feeling that some open yours for no other reason than to take a jab at you. You take it in stride admirably.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Fewer. <br /><br />And honestly, the fact that you started a thread to put it to a vote is exactly the kind of thing that's starting to feel like an issue.<br /><br />Oh - and it really doesn't have anything to do with being a Newbie or not. It has to do with the nature and number of posts by any individual. By framing the question as pertaining to new people, I think you will skew results. Also, it would be a shame if new people were discouraged from posting because of comments in this thread that may be directed to Peter and not to new people in general.<br /><br />Joann<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>That is excruciatingly boring. Talking about who should post and in what manner. Who cares. If you have a question, just ask it.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Peter- I think you are a good guy and you've taken a lot of flak from a lot of people on this board. And you seem to have a great deal of enthusiasm for this hobby.<br /><br />But as long as you are asking, I think you start too many threads, many of which don't seem to be focussed. It's like any random thought that comes into your head seems like a reason to start a new post.<br /><br />And you also have a habit of dragging up old threads. Sometimes days or even a week after a thread has finished you start it up again as if the previous poster made his point ten minutes ago.<br /><br />Maybe you are just a bit overexuberant, but you might want to post a little less and when you do, try to relate it more to some substantive baseball card topic. Talking about the Colorado Rockies is fine, but all of your posting just seems to be a little off target.<br /><br />And I only bring this up because you asked.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Just look at all the equivocal answers I'm getting on this thread. The only useful direction I'm getting is more quality than quantitity. But that is exactly the problem, I don't purposely post nonsensical and whimsical ideas. Believe it or not I do cancel posts when I think people won't be interested.<br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Peter, if you even have to start a thread like this what does that say about your own feelings on the issue? Perhaps you could exercise some insight here. Just a tad. And considering the vast amount of people that criticize your relentless and random musings, hasn't this already been put to a vote?<br /><br /> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> &lt;--- note smileys<br /><br />Edited to add: Man, I would love to see some of those canceled posts.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>A lot fewer--and please make them about what this board is supposed to be about. Even this post is ridiculous.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jim, your response appears to be somewhat equivocal. Perhaps you could make your thoughts a bit clearer on this issue for Peter's sake.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>"Man, I would love to see some of those canceled posts."<br /><br />Um, take that to private emails, Jeff. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>You're right Jeff--I was not clear enough. AAAAAAAGGGGHHHH--STOP IT PLEASE PETER_-----ONE THREAD A WEEK AND MAKE IT SOMETHING TO DO WITH VINTAGE SPORTS CARDS!!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Quality Peter would include respecting yourself so much that you care about what you type. Things like looking up the difference in the careers of Bengough and Pafko for example, before you assume that both were equivalent players. And other research to make certain that what you have typed is well thought out and based in fact. It is simply a matter of pride, imo.<br /><br />How often do you encounter posters on this board whose position or statement is incorrect? Very, very infrequently, in my experience. Although some opinions may differ; the factual aspects have that as their commonality.<br /><br />These statements are intended to help, much like others have suggested to me to put out an additional effort to make clear statements. I hope this is clear.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>Johnny O'Connor: Hello Harry, how's tricks? <br />Harry: Not bad for an old dog. <br />Johnny O'Connor: Is it the booze, Harry? The dames? I'll cut back. <br />Harry: No it isn't that. <br />Johnny O'Connor: Is it the pills? <br />Harry: No. <br />Johnny O'Connor: The sheep? <br />Harry: No. <br />Johnny O'Connor: The ducks? <br />Harry: No. <br />Johnny O'Connor: Your wife? <br />Harry: No. WHAT? <br />Harry: I think you should take a rest too. A permanent one. <br />Johnny O'Connor: What do you mean? <br />Harry: I'm letting you go. <br />Johnny O'Connor: You mean? <br />Harry: Yes your contract isn't being renewed. You're finished, Johnny! <br />Johnny O'Connor: Don't mince words! <br />Harry: I think you stink! <br />Johnny O'Connor: Listen Harry if you're unhappy with my work say so now! <br />Harry: You're threw, you'll never work in this town again! I think you're the worst actor I've ever seen and I get 500 letters a day telling me the same! <br />Johnny O'Connor: What's the word on the street?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>"...considering the vast amount of people that criticize your relentless and random musings..." Is that you Bruce? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />But, I have to agree, fewer posts, more relevant particiption in others.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Sorry, Steve, no more three syllable words...<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Seth B.</b><p>Peter, your posts are consistent in their almost entire lack of discussion of any cards. Comment on other people's threads. If you can't, then sit around and learn. This is getting a bit much. I don't post often, and I haven't weighed in, but your posts are generally awful. Collect some cards, then come back and chat.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>Less posts. Stick to vintage cards.<br><br>Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>Though I find a fair number of your posts oddly put and not born of strong desire to know a particular fact that perhaps has eluded you - and instead more of a compulsive desire to chat and be chatted to....I don't think it's my place to question your right to posting your thoughts, the format, or whether they are pertinent. As others have written, I can always skip a thread I'm not enjoying or feel has no value to me.<br /><br />What bugs me mainly are two things.<br />You monopolize discussion WITHIN particular threads, which I assure you discourages wider participation with you constantly changing the direction and point of the thread, and just plainly tires me out reading - it sucks the wind right out of any intersting thinking being shown by others. And the whole shtick you've got of running between a couple of posters making conversation with them when you haven't been targeted for discussion, and re-conjure what they must be thinking based on what they've written...honestly, you're not that intuitive or bright to be guessing everyones thoughts and presenting them anew with your 'greater or clearer' meaning for our digestion. And frankly - that's not a slam. Others shouldn't do it either (and largely don't) unless they're dealing with friends they know and therefore have deeper knowledge of what might be meant, or said in a thread. <br /><br />And to Gil's point, all too often I find your stated facts and positions plain wrong. Silly wrong. And the whole legal expertise thing.....there are people on this board with EXTRAORDINARY legal accumen and they tend to only offer opinion where the topic makes sense. And then in reading their thoughts it becomes clear they know what they're talking about. Too often reading your legalese it feels like I'm watching an episode of LA Law.<br /><br /><br />So if you could just resist sharing you're every thought, I'll keep my mouth shut and similarly post only what little I know. <br /><br /><br />Sincerely<br />Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Cobby33</b><p>Go for it!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>How long is a newbie offically a newbie? Is this in the official newbie rulesbies? The idea of telling someone what or how often to post is ludicrous. Has Peter been called "insufferable"? Yes, and more. But so what? I'm more or a newbie than he is, and yes I have more restraint. But the idea of someone telling me what and how often to post? It seems to me there are alot more people posting on this board lately since the "house cleaning" a few weeks ago. Some of them come on with their first post and ask "I hope you don't mind me posting but I have a question..." IMHO all this kind of ganging up on Peter discourages that, and this kind of ganging up is reminiscent of the trite stuff that sometimes rears it's head here. I'd be curious if some of these are the same people who complain about leaving or getting tossed from the LTS who are now involved? Peter is not the only one who needs lessons on etiquette, myself included.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Paul- but Peter did ask the question, the board didn't initiate it. We've just responded.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Paul, Peter is the one that started this thread. He's the one who asked for guidance. No one had previously before told him not to post. Any criticism he received previously had nothing to do with any "newbie" status he may hold. Hell, my perception was that he had been here forever.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>reminds me of watching ozzy osburne or britney spears...you just have to see what they will say next...also kinda like watching a train wreck, you cover your eyes about 90%, but you are still peaking to see what it looks like...<br /><br /><img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />answer: you do seem like a good guy, just please be more selective with the questions or topics you post...as several have said above...quality over quantity.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Barry and Jeff, That's true. But the Congrats Pete C. thread was started first, and not by him. I'd hate to think he it was he felt intimidated or defensive enough to have to do that (Okay so it's hard to imagine him feeling like that!) but wonder if other posters, newbies included, might begin to feel inferior and maybe not as worthy to post their thoughts and questions due to some self doubt. Look, sometimes Peter can make me momemtarily infuriated and then it passes and the forum goes on, and obviously I am not alone. But I don't think this is hardly the stuff for this kind of reaction, our own, and the fact that he'd have to start this thread. Where does it stop? For example, I like the Seinfeld quips, but others have stated they do not, or are just not into it. And I'd bet there are more of those than Peter's posts. Can you imagine being told not to post them? I guess I'm trying to say, How do we know where it ends?<br /><br />*edited to add: Jeff, I thought he'd been here forever too!<br />*edited second time to add: Sorry, I may be wrong on the timing of the two threads, although he says in his initial post above, "You guys and gals are right, I'm a newbie and I've been throwing my weight around."

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I have been told not to post Seinfeld trivia...but I do it anyway, just less often. Hey, what's a guy to do.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>You have actually been told not to? For shame. Your boys should be unfettered, out there, and loving it!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>peter,some of your posts are great stuff,just try to stay on topic. sometimes i really think you post just to post. when you feel the urge to do this, scan a vintage card and start a post about that card or set.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I got taken to task by those who didn't like hijacked threads. But just as many, if not more people, said they enjoyed them. You can't please everyone.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob Dewolf</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />I've been one to contribute criticisms of Peter's posts (and I've typed then deleted many more than I've actually posted), but they had nothing to do with him being a "newbie." The criticisms had everything to do with the inaneness of the questions and comments.<br /><br />Peter seems to have jumped to the conclusion that his self-appointed newbie status is the reason he takes flak sometimes. I don't think that has much to do with it at all and would never suggest the amount of time someone has spent on a board such as this dictate how much or little he or she posts.<br /><br />I can't speak for how others feel.<br /><br />Added for fear of reprisal from Lichtman: <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Watch out for Lichtman- he's a shark in the courtroom! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />(hey Jeff- steak on Wednesday!)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>medium-rare?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Medium rare porterhouse...doesn't get any better than that!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Rob, I know that and get it. Probably if I had split my post and put half of it on the Congrats thread and left the newbie stuff on this one I might have been more decipherable. This one, though, seemed to me like a continuation of the other, as if Peter felt he needed to start one just to defend himself -- and actually to his credit he was open to ideas, which is something I can't even always say about myself. To me, there's nothing wrong with anyone civlilly criticizing someone else's posts, even without the smiley faces. I think I saw the Congrats thread becomming more than that. Frankly, I was getting used to the several weeks of relative calm and great card talk around here...that's my own newbie mistake, I should have known better! <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob Dewolf</b><p>&lt;sniff, sniff&gt; I smell a hijack coming on.<br /><br />Edited to add clarification that I'm referring to the steak comments and not Paul's reply. Also needed to add: <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />Newbie status has nothing to do with it. I voiced that opinion right away - see upthread - for the exact reasons you mention. Peter characterized this as a question pertaining to newbie status and it is not. <br /><br />If someone that is new starts posting and has decent questions, genuine input, whatever, this does not happen. If someone new comes in and starts splashing around and posting OT and monopolizing threads or whatever it is, that person will get called out.<br /><br />If someone that has been around awhile started posting OT and monopolizing threads and telling posters what their posts meant and asking very peripheral hobby questions several times a day, that person too would eventually get called out. It may take awhile longer, but it would happen.<br /><br />I don't see anything wrong with that, I don't really see it as people telling each other what they can and can't post, and I definitely don't see it as a newbie issue.<br /><br />It's a community of people maintaining an equilibrium among themselves, just as most communities do.<br /><br />Plus, he asked. Actually, he started a thread for the purpose of asking.<br /><br />Joann<br /><br />Oh - have to add the smiley: <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> What is this, the secret Lichtman Net54 handshake now?? hee

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Yes, medium-rare. I can't even begin to tell you guys how excited I am for a Weds steak. With work and twin 3 year olds dominating my life, I cannot recall the last time I've had a dinner out that did not involve me having to dispense legal advice. And to actually spend time talking about baseball cards (other than explaining to my wife why I receive a package in the mail nearly every day) sends me over the moon.<br /><br />Edited to add: Rob, I really think two smileys might be more appropriate for your posts. One just doesn't feel...right.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>Peter C, I don't have any problem with the number of times you start threads...hell, your probably the only one that starts more than I do, and a majority of mine could also be construed as unknowledgable and unworthy....but who really cares?<br /><br />If you change anything though...would be nice if you'd jump in with some scans of some of your cards...maybe some of your Goudey's or T206's you say you have...I can't ever remember seeing any scans from you..and certainly you can afford a $100 scanner on your salary. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>I've seen a few of Peter's cards in person. Includes a real nice T206 Johnson Portrait and a super nice 33 Goudey Bengaugh. Trouble is that he carries them around in his pants pocket secured with a rubber band. (True).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob Pomilla</b><p>If they're being toted around in his pocket, are they at least encapsulated? Top-loaded?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>Top loaders.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Pants pockets are probably the safest place? Who's gonna put their hand in his pocket?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>porterhouse?<br /><br />barry is not going with a t-bone?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Joann,<br /><br />Probably your post to me and my reply to Rob several posts above yours were written about the same time and crossed. I think it answers some of your statements, and reiterate that most likely I should have posted my "mob mentality" theme to the "congrats..." thread and the newbie theme to this one. You are correct about the way members of this board tend to police each other and that is good and I agree with you. However, I still do not see the other "congrats" thread as calling someone out, certainly not directly -- rather, several of those first few posts are sarcastic jabs that offer nothing in the way of constructive means of communication. In turn, Peter may be many things but never in my recollection has he been malicious...if he insults someone it is by way of an unfocused or untuned action on his part. In return, he is sometimes a recipient of an intentionally nasty barb.<br /><br />My initial post in this thread was in reaction to the class-action nastiness of that thread (not all the posts there, of course.) A whole thread ("congrats...") started and devoted to Peter? He didn't require some stand-out intervention. Even Dorskind's random hate emails didn't rank that, and the Behrens(sp?) ejection was an off-topic instrusion.<br /><br />The pity of it is, is that I have just been over to the "congrats..." thread and now, several hours later, see Peter writing in a tone that I have never heard from him before -- defensive, one-up-man-ship, beginning to degrade others. To me, it's a shame he's pressed to that point. I'm not a Peter defender or otherwise -- it's the situation.<br /><br />Paul<br /><br />p.s. Now I see why I rarely get involved in these things --<br />you have to hang around the joint all night writing more, when I could be scanning cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />I think you're right about a lot of the things you said. But the way that a group self-polices, so to speak, is pretty predictable and I think we are following it pretty closely here. I think the progression is joking comments, then sarcastic comments and snide remarks, then polite but pointed requests to change, and finally not-so-polite requests to change. <br /><br />This board has been in that second phase with Peter - the sarcastic comments - for quite awhile now, and now we are into the third stage. It is clear that most people that responded to Peter's question with the opinion that he should start fewer threads or posts or whatever went out of their way to be very polite to him. Even nice.<br /><br />Personally, I think it's taken this long for this group precisely because Peter seems to be such a nice guy, and because sometimes his posts are interesting. To be honest, I think he's gotten way, way more latitude than most people would.<br /><br />I agree that his tone has been different tonight, and that's regrettable because he seems like a good-hearted guy. But he did ask the question. And despite the fact that the behavior can almost be endearing sometimes - you just about have to chuckle - on the whole I think these threads have shown that there are a lot of people that it's wearing thin on.<br /><br />So I feel bad for Peter - really I do. But this group has a culture and tone and set of mores just like any other group, and no individual can jump in and demand change just because he arrived on the scene. And if he or she wants to act in a notably different way - well, the rest are eventually going to say something and the person shouldn't decide that's an insult.<br /><br />Groups act by group norms. That's how it is. I just can't quite get my mind around the fact that someone new would be surprised or offended by this. <br /><br />Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Joann,<br /><br />I can pretty much agree with everything as you stated it, and it is, as you say, "regrettable."<br />Re your closing <i>"I just can't quite get my mind around the fact that someone new would be surprised or offended by this."</i><br />Maybe you've bumped up against a level of obliviousness (if that's a word) that is not often encountered. <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Paul<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Adam</b><p>My jaw dropped when I saw that post about 1% of all baseball card collectors belonging to Net 54.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>"So here's your chance to limit my posts if you want to. I will go with the majority."<br /><br />The majority spoke loud and clear. So Peter responded by resurrecting an old thread about attic finds and asked a trivia question about which came first, the attic or the basement.<br /><br />And now he won't even post his smiley faces which were designed solely to curry favor with the board! Whoa is me.<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> &lt;----- note smiley faces