Posted By:
Gilbert MainesWell gentlemen, you raise some questions that I should address before I get too far afield here. Since I am assembling data, I need to make an initial determination of what data to reject (what is not a card).
My feeling is that Burdick was very liberal in his assessments and I think that we should follow that beginning. It really is up to individual collectors to specialize. However, I do not plan to include items which are not composed of cellulose, ie. metal, plastic, natural and synthetic fibers, etc. It gotta be a paper type product. I have no limitations envisioned regarding size, weight, shape nor other physical characteristics.
Regarding initial catagorizations, as you point out, there is plenty of room for arguement here, and research, and more. But in general, I do not believe that t, e and other primary designations should be our default. I think that you have to earn it to be a t-card. H or W is a different story. I think those are better default catagories until we can more clearly establish a card's origin. But the more stuff which we have undocumented regarding catagorization, the harder our sell becomes. I do not think that we should put forth as the product of our efforts a documentation of uncertainty, unless it is necessary.
An acceptable (to me) net result of this initial effort could be the determination of what further study has to be performed in order to present a summary of caliber adequate for inclusion in a guide. Afterall, we can not change our mind each year.
And if we do this well, we have credibility established for generation of other, more difficult sell, changes.
If the above is unclear please tell me.