[JLange]

Bob, I understand your explanation, and I accept that there are constraints on manpower, pagecount, etc., and I even accept that the catalog needs to find a way to be profitable. That said, I have always thought of the "Big Book" as THE Authority on Baseball Cards, NON-Card Baseball items, and a bunch of other stuff Baseball related. I can't stand to see the decisions to wack one set over another. As far as I'm concerned, if an item was meant to be cut out, saved, and collected, then it should be catalogued. At this point, I would be much more interested in a wikipedia approach where anyone can catalog what they have found, and experts among us can be the gatekeepers of this information. I think people have really come to rely on the information in the Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards as authoritative and comprehensive, or at least striving to be, and when you see sets left out, taken out, or only periodically rotated in, that turns the "Big Book" into just another book. I may be preaching to the choir, and I really respect the fact that you personnaly give life to a lot of these sets in your blog posts and catalog updates where able, but overall I see this as a frustrating topic.