[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Goldner

With regard to updates, my opinion is relatively simple:

1)i have no problem with assigning catalogue numbers, to sets that haven't been previously catalogued,

2)in most instances, i wouldn't object to the designation of sub-types (under Burdick's original catalogue number), to the variety of sets that were lumped together, in the earlier editions.

3)What i would object to, would be the changing of any of Burdick's catalogue numbers, due to real or perceived errors in the original manuscript, or for any other reason thereof.

I just don't see it as wise course of action, to correct any of Burdick's real or perceived errors.

However, expanding upon Burdick's work, in theory, is an acceptable course of action.

Other considerations:

1)who owns the publishing rights to the ACC?
Nostalgia Press Inc.?
What are the legal ramifications, to such a venture?
Would attorney's have to enter into the equation?
Would rights have to be purchased?

2)under an assumption that rights need not be purchased, what if another small group forms, and decides that they are more knowledgable and better capitalized, and can do the job better than the original small group? Then what?

3)along with the notoriety of expanding such a work, comes responsibility.
That responsibility would entail the dealing with a publisher.
Enough copies must be purchased initially, to make it worth a publisher's while, to become part of the venture.
Once published, there is the responsibility of making certain that there enough copies printed, to accomodate everyone who might want one.
I'm sure that there are other things to consider here, as well.

Call it the dirty work, if you will.

In any event, i would recommend that all of the bases be covered, before jumping into this headfirst.