So if a collector prefers a 52 Mantle or the like to a CJ Pratt or other rare, relative common, then he's not a "collector?" Says who-- maybe I missed the memo that specified what cards constitute a collection over a mere portfolio.
If I track down a Frederick Foto Ruth I guess I'm a collector-- but if I add a PSA 9 Schmidt or PSA 10 Brett, where do I go to forfeit my collector badge?
Some guys like both cards that are tough in any grade and cards that are just pricey in higher grade. Some guys enjoy spending money on a common player that other guys would have trashed right out of the pack. Some guys collect plastic holders and grades and don't compare the cards within said holders, just choosing the uglier yet higher graded specimen. Some guys will only buy from one TPG and blind themselves to great cards. Some collect to compete with other collectors over arbitrary GPAs of sets on a website. Some like to buy unopened. Some like freakish errors even if the player featured was a scrub. Some just like the most popular images of the most accomplished players ever.
Some of that seems very silly and foolish to me, some is the way I go, but I say live (collect) and let live (collect). If a guy is happy no need to rain on any parades. Almost always, there will be others out there somewhere who likes what another guy likes, so there will be a group of some size to appreciate any card and make a market for it.
Above all I'd hazard the opinion that collectors of cards-- no matter what cards-- have more in common than not, and should therefore be collegial toward one another as opposed to catty (like chicks). Reminds me of how silly it seems when sports fans of rival teams pummel each other in a brawl; meanwhile these combatants are probably both passionate fans of their sport, and would likely help each other if caught in some crisis. But perhaps that's the human condition, to look for reasons to divide rather than come together.
Hence my constant, raging misanthropy
