RockMyAmadeus

This is inaccurate.

It is not an argument, it is a discussion and (was) a very interesting one...until some point. I'm using the word "argument" in its meaning of "a series of statements employed to determine the degree of truth of a conclusion." ...not in its meaning of "a heated exchange."

Indeed. As I noted above, it's not a matter of truth or correctness with a certain segment...it's about proving to everyone (and especially to self) that someone else is **wrong**...about an ESTIMATION, no less...so they can feel "right." "If so and so would just admit that they're WRONG"...when they don't even know or understand what the other party has said. If you don't grasp the basic principle of someone's position, how can you possibly know that they are wrong...? That's not good faith. And discussion with those types of personalities is fruitless.

While I generally agree with this, not every collector has an identical personality or equal resources. No, I understand, and that's absolutely true. I'll take "general agreement", because there are always exceptions.

I've given, at several points, how I define what a collector is. Understanding my definition...whether or not one agrees with it...is critical to understanding my ESTIMATION (not contention, as has been inaccurately repeated multiple times at this point.) If one refuses to acknowledge...again, whether they agree or not....the foundation of my argument, anything based on that foundation won't be understood, and will be dismissed. While I agree with you in principle, I don't think that can happen with the current discussees.

This is inaccurate (sentence above preserved for context.)

This is inaccurate.

I'll point to Lazyboy's example above, and counter with "not every copy was saved by collectors." I have things that I have saved for 30 years...not because I'm "collecting" them, but because they're not in anyone's way.

Precisely.

When people "reject" arguments that no one made, when people argue obvious exceptions as if they "disprove the rule", those arguments aren't rational, no matter how impassioned they may be, nor are they particularly honest. Discussing in good faith means giving the benefit of the doubt, listening to what the other party is saying, and making a sincere effort to understand where they are coming from, regardless of agreement. Inventing positions that no one took and then arguing against those, arguing exceptions...that's not a good faith effort. It's grandstanding to prove to everyone (and, perhaps most importantly, yourself) how "right" you are. If people clearly have no interest in operating in good faith, there is no common ground, utterly regardless of the issues involved, and such discussions become meaningless. Further discussion with those individuals yields nothing, and at that point, you walk away and disengage. You will never find common ground with such people.

Indeed, so convoluted as to be meaningless. The very premise isn't accurate, so everything built on that foundation is, necessarily, inaccurate. The issue isn't "condition"...it's preservation. If you don't seek to preserve your "collection" in a meaningful way...then you're not a collector. You're a hoarder. It has nothing to do with being "fixated on condition." It is a fundamental acknowledgement that if you don't PRESERVE your collection, then you are doing the OPPOSITE of collecting...and the items you purport to be "collecting" will be lost to attrition. It's foolishness to classify someone as a "collector" who makes no effort to preserve the things they claim to be collecting...it negates the very definition of the word "collector." "What are all these comic books strewn all over the floor?" "Oh, that's my collection." "Collection....?? I don't think that word means what you think it means."

What is that...is that...lutefisk....?

Irresponsible to a fault, and selfish. If it was really a mistake, there was nothing stopping him/her from contacting you immediately. I'd block, but eBay says that user name is invalid.

Maybe. Maybe not.

A collector would convince his parents that he took his hobby seriously, like that kid in that 1940s picture, cataloging, storing, and preserving them. Are they in heaps all over the floor? Then they're trash, and you're not a collector. Are they in a box that never got thrown out, but which you never looked at again after their initial purchase? Then you're not a collector. Are they neatly stacked in their own place, with some type of cataloging system, and systematic effort made to storing and preserving them? Then you're a collector. Very few are the parents who would throw something away that a kid takes an obvious responsibility for. Does that mean some mothers won't toss them out anyway? No, but it greatly reduces the risk of it. It isn't any one factor that determines who was, and who was not, a collector...it's all the factors listed above.

And having seen all the trailers thus far, I am not hopeful about this movie. It looks really silly, and the whole "talking to Eddie" that the symbiote does really ratchets up the silliness. It would have had much, much more impact if that voice were saved ONLY for when Eddie is Venom, talking to others. Having the symbiote talk to Eddie loses a ton if impact.

There is nothing "classic" about the cover to ASM #300. It's a good cover...but it's hardly classic, and it's hardly unique. THIS is a classic cover: Here's how you determine if something is a "classic cover" or not: 1. If it is impactful. If it made most people say "holy shnit. Wow." when it came out. 2. If it is well designed (this is the layout and use of space.) 3. If it is well executed (this is the quality of the linework itself.) 4. It's original - it's not an idea that's been done and/or seen before. 5. If it is easily understood by all who see it. 6. If multiple generations, upon first encountering it, have the same reaction. And it has to have ALL those qualities, not just some of them. Here is another classic cover: THIS is a classic cover: THIS is a classic cover: That doesn't mean it's not a historic cover...it is. But it's not a classic cover, and there's a difference. When it came out, the reaction to the cover wasn't especially strong. It was good, it was well done...but people's reaction was to the interior art...that's what made buyers say "whoa...what on earth is THIS now??" Here's the most important thing to avoid: do not mistake your personal nostalgic feelings for a cover for an objective analysis of what makes a "classic" cover. It's easy to do that...but it would be a mistake. Yes, I know people will disagree. Those who disagree, I would invite you to come up with your own definitions for what makes a "classic" cover and/or why ASM #300 would fit the bill.

It's too bad Spidey didn't make guest appearances in other mags very often in the 60s. Those crossovers would be epic. I suspect it was because other artists just couldn't/didn't want to draw him. Useless trivia challenge: Name the first time Spidey appears in the following titles (any appearance, no matter how trivial....but it has to be SPIDEY himself, not just his face on a balloon, picture, or t-shirt)...be careful...some of these are trickier than others..........mwah ha ha haaaa! Avengers - Captain America - Daredevil - Doctor Strange - Fantastic Four - Incredible Hulk - Iron Man - Journey Into Mystery - Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. - Silver Surfer - Strange Tales - Sub-Mariner - Tales to Astonish - Tales of Suspense - X-Men -

I hope you didn't catch anything when you bagged that one.....

Oh God...oh God, that's so sexy. Drool. (Yes, there's something wrong with me.)

Well. Ok then.

Are you on Sabbatical...? That's the only thing that would explain this spate of new threads on esoteric comic related concepts.

Hopefully, you won't be offended by what has been said here, but will learn from the collected wisdom of these boards, which is substantial. It would be like me talking about some aspect of a 1953 Corvette to a message board of Corvette collectors and dealers. I know *just enough* to know that I have no clue what I'm talking about, and I would look a little silly trying to insist something that wasn't even remotely the case. These are after market stickers. There were multiple distributors at the time they were distributed, and even if one of them did apply the stickers, it wouldn't matter...they aren't Marvel, so it's not official. An exception from the same era? This: So what's different between the two? Besides a giant sticker stuck to the front cover of the bottom copy? The second copy has no price in the price box. They were PRINTED, at Marvel's direction, at the PRINTER...World Color in Sparta, IL...on purpose. If the bottom copy was just a regular printing with the All sticker added to it, it would be worth very little. After all, anyone can just add a sticker to anything they want after the fact, regardless of why, regardless of how professionally that sticker was made. But because there's a PRINTING difference, all those copies are worth substantially more than the "regular copies." But ONLY because they have a PRINTED (not just stickered) difference. If your copies had a blank price in the price box....THEN we'd be talking, and you'd have found something incredibly interesting. Sadly, you have common copies of common books with a defacing sticker on them...worth maybe $1-$2 each. Sorry.

Making an offer is a GREAT way to have a seller check a price that he/she wouldn't normally have done. If the item is underpriced....buy it. Don't try and haggle..just buy it. I've had books that people tried to haggle, and I saw it was selling for quite a bit more than my ask...they get mad, and my response is "you should have bought it while you had the chance." And I've also sold books that had become underpriced, and the buyer wisely bought it outright, instead of trying for an even better deal. Oops.