Posted By:
Gilbert MainesBrian: Please correct me where I am wrong.
It is my understanding that we are proceeding in a committee format. Specifically, I have accepted the responsibility for the initial assembly of the bulk of the set identification necessary to be compiled in order to address the work scope.
Upon completion of this effort (Revision 0 is complete) it will be posted somewhere to be investigated by all. The intent of this posting is to seek input regarding:
- which of the sets are already ACC designated
- which sets were overlooked in my tabulation
- which sets should be combined
- which should be identified seperately
- which set groupings should also be included (foreign, cloth or other materials of construction, advertising trade cards, others
- what else should be done
- what else should be done differently
Once this group effort is complete, I will retabulate the sets, add proposed ACC designations, and repost the "pre-final" revision for final comments, corrections and other adjustments.
Upon posting of the final configuration for this phase of our effort, discussion of how to present the labor of our love, and identification of who it should be presented to will establish the recommended course of action. At that time, someone or several individuals hopefully will pick up those balls.
Any effort to change the existing ACC, if it proceeds at all, could proceed on a different course.
This is my view of what we are doing. I could be alone on this, because as you aptly point out, we have not clearly defined our approach.
I am open to alternate paths, so long as they terminate at the same destination. Please everyone cite the path you prefer that we take.
I am currently seeking a location to post the information (which is in Word format). It does not come out well, if I post it in this thread. If no location is forthcoming, I will seek out the card pricing utility operators, to determine if they will host the posting. Or I will come up with a Geocities page.
ItsOnlyGil