[JustinD]

Originally Posted by G1911

In turn, not picking on you, but your formulation here assumes the answer as a required condition of the question. If we cannot find anything that "completely disregard[s] hundreds of widely accepted issues"; we are dictating the answer without inquiry. If we decide that to answer the question, we cannot find anything that says general hobby understanding, definitions, perceptions or beliefs are incorrect, then we dictate the answer without any reason entering into it or any examination. This is a normal thing people do, to postulate that we cannot find what we do not want to find, but of course it is the opposite of logic. This is a very unimportant issue, but one doesn't arrive at truth by determining that the answer to a question must be that the status quo is right. From unimportant categorization to where and when cards were printed to things outside the hobby that actually matter, one arrives at the truth by following logic and the evidence, not pre-concluding the outcome of an inquiry. This is probably why the genuine research threads are so barren; it requires a different starting point and basis than the hobby generally likes in its discussion. If we don't determine the conclusion before the inquiry, we often find what we thought before is wrong. I certainly have many times.

Love the reply, and thank you for understanding how different opinions work. Sadly a lost art in today’s society.

I can see your point and respect your conclusions. I just collect on a looser definition of whatever the first release to the public consumption is the rookie and any paper ephemera is qualified to be a card. I guess as the true entomology of the word card is not a shortened version of cardboard (as the invention was hundreds of years later) but derived from the Latin for a leaf of paper, (or papyrus which would disqualify everything lol) thus by my interpretation, anything made of paper can fit under the umbrella.