With regard to the whole debate of whether or not older and newer cards should be graded in the same way, it helps to take a page from archaeology.
For centuries, the only royal tombs found in Egypt were destroyed by time and/or plundered by ancient grave robbers. So all the tombs uncovered by archaeologists were in pretty rough shape and it seemed that nothing better would ever be found. But they were undoubtedly very excited that these sites were discovered in the first place. If these tombs were graded based primarily on the fact that they simply survived all of these years, then each would've received a high mark. So what would have happened to this grading system when Howard Carter stumbled onto King Tut's tomb in 1922? A nearly pristine, nearly entirely complete tomb with all of its riches intact. If an old rundown tomb got an ESA (Egyptian Site Authenticators) 8, Tut's tomb would have had to be given an EGA 13!!!!
(It's a metaphor, so if any of you closet Egyptologists are going to chime in and 'correct' me on certain facts, save it.)
