Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbmd
about Ted's requests. Is a 34 card Monster subset really worthy of a Monster Number or is it some form of Submonster? An accomplishment without doubt but a comparable number to the remainder of the list, I think not. We may be getting into the apples and oranges argument if we continue to add subsets indiscriminately. To date any such variations have been cited as footnotes. I guess, if it were my 34 card subset and it was on a list below Joe Blow's legitimate 35 Monster number that consisted of a stack of beaters, I would be insulted. What percentage of casual viewers take time to read the footnotes anyway? Furthermore if the footnote thing got out of control and more lengthy, I would expect fewer would read them or really care. The subject of back subsets et al was entertained as a possible future consideration in my original post, but has been avoided until recently. I would however encourage members to post such subsets in the thread, but will not dilute the purity of Monster Number list further. A list of references to such posts by post number can be included under the list in Post#1, so that subset enthusiasts can find these unique collections readily.
Hopefully, Ted, you will understand and accept my reasoning here. If you don't, sweetening the pot on our Tinker deal can't hurt. 
Frank
I'll try to review the thread to create a list of relevant posts soon. |
Frank,
So does that mean you won't count my complete (3 card) Lundgren Chicago subset?
Best Regards and Happy Collecting
