Do You Feel The Church Books Being Stored in Stacks

[nearmint]

Who said that was the goal, Doc?

 

Bill said that has to be accomplished before anything else.

 

Bill said that the goal of NOD is to convince EVERYONE that pressing is restoration?

 

Knowing your love of dramatic hyperbole, you don't mind if I ask for a linky-poo?

 

The goal of NOD is disclosure. Beyond that, individual members may believe whatever they want personally. There has always been room for a range of opinion beyond the disclosure issue. But since you're not a member, how would you know that?

 

It's easier to presume you know what you're talking about, I suppose.

 

Who said that was NOD's goal? Not me. Bill made the statement, doc asked how you're going to accomplish that. NOD wasn't mentioned until you got into it.

 

As you can see.....Bill did not make that statement. Again, try, as hard as it might be.....to stick to the facts. It will do wonders for your arguments.

 

Here's Bill's statement:

 

Once we past the obvious (pressing = restoration) then we can have substantive discussion on how to address its place in the hobby. You may find we have much more agreement there. However, we can never seem to get to that stage.

 

So what the hell are you talking about?

[Red Hook]

Why not rejoin and help out? Instead of complaining?

 

You call it complaining. I call them constructive ideas on how you could be getting the word across better. If I were a member, I'd be saying the same things.

 

So you are privy to all discussions within NOD? You know for a fact that these specific topics have not been discussed?

 

Coming from someone who wants the entire debate to disappear, forgive me my cynicism.

 

I don't need to be privy to NOD discusses among its members to see what they do and don't do publicly, and it ain't much.

 

So if that's the case, why do you continually get your undies in a bunch over what they do or don't do? Sound like it's personal to me.

[DrWatson]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is restoration. I understand there are people, such as yourself, that already believe this and therefore do not need convincing and are not included under the umbrella of "everyone."

[Red Hook]

Who said that was the goal, Doc?

 

Bill said that has to be accomplished before anything else.

 

Bill said that the goal of NOD is to convince EVERYONE that pressing is restoration?

 

Knowing your love of dramatic hyperbole, you don't mind if I ask for a linky-poo?

 

The goal of NOD is disclosure. Beyond that, individual members may believe whatever they want personally. There has always been room for a range of opinion beyond the disclosure issue. But since you're not a member, how would you know that?

 

It's easier to presume you know what you're talking about, I suppose.

 

Who said that was NOD's goal? Not me. Bill made the statement, doc asked how you're going to accomplish that. NOD wasn't mentioned until you got into it.

 

As you can see.....Bill did not make that statement. Again, try, as hard as it might be.....to stick to the facts. It will do wonders for your arguments.

 

Here's Bill's statement:

 

Once we past the obvious (pressing = restoration) then we can have substantive discussion on how to address its place in the hobby. You may find we have much more agreement there. However, we can never seem to get to that stage.

 

So what the hell are you talking about?

 

So how do you get NOD's MISSION IS TO GET EVERYONE TO BELIEVE THAT PRESSING IS RESTORATION from that???

[seanfingh]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is not pressing.

 

Oh, man. First the debate that pressing is not resto and now a new debate that pressing is not pressing . . .

[nearmint]

Why not rejoin and help out? Instead of complaining?

 

You call it complaining. I call them constructive ideas on how you could be getting the word across better. If I were a member, I'd be saying the same things.

 

So you are privy to all discussions within NOD? You know for a fact that these specific topics have not been discussed?

 

Coming from someone who wants the entire debate to disappear, forgive me my cynicism.

 

I don't need to be privy to NOD discusses among its members to see what they do and don't do publicly, and it ain't much.

 

So if that's the case, why do you continually get your undies in a bunch over what they do or don't do? Sound like it's personal to me.

 

That says more about your cynical nature than the reality of the situation. I see an organization that wants to effect change, but isn't trying hard enough. I simply offered some constructive ideas. Anything beyond that was manufactured by your cynical imagination.

 

If I wanted the conversation to end, as you suggest, why would I be offering ideas for how NOD could succeed?

[DrWatson]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is not pressing.

 

Oh, man. First the debate that pressing is not resto and now a new debate that pressing is not pressing . . .

I need a five minute delay to correct my mistakes before you quote me.

[nearmint]

Who said that was the goal, Doc?

 

Bill said that has to be accomplished before anything else.

 

Bill said that the goal of NOD is to convince EVERYONE that pressing is restoration?

 

Knowing your love of dramatic hyperbole, you don't mind if I ask for a linky-poo?

 

The goal of NOD is disclosure. Beyond that, individual members may believe whatever they want personally. There has always been room for a range of opinion beyond the disclosure issue. But since you're not a member, how would you know that?

 

It's easier to presume you know what you're talking about, I suppose.

 

Who said that was NOD's goal? Not me. Bill made the statement, doc asked how you're going to accomplish that. NOD wasn't mentioned until you got into it.

 

As you can see.....Bill did not make that statement. Again, try, as hard as it might be.....to stick to the facts. It will do wonders for your arguments.

 

Here's Bill's statement:

 

Once we past the obvious (pressing = restoration) then we can have substantive discussion on how to address its place in the hobby. You may find we have much more agreement there. However, we can never seem to get to that stage.

 

So what the hell are you talking about?

 

So how do you get NOD's MISSION IS TO GET EVERYONE TO BELIEVE THAT PRESSING IS RESTORATION from that???

 

Read my posts, Brad. In fact, you quote my post above where I said Bill made the statement, not NOD. It was you that brought NOD into this part of the discussion, not Bill, not doc, not me.

[Red Hook]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is restoration. I understand there are people, such as yourself, that already believe this and therefore do not need convincing and are not included under the umbrella of "everyone."

 

I personally believe that some forms of pressing fall clearly under the category of restoration. I do not expect everyone to agree with me. I am not out to convince everyone that it is. All I want is to get the facts out in front of as many people as possible over time, and let them decide for themselves.

 

But I do believe that the disclosure of such practices is in the best interests of the buyer, the hobby and yes, the seller. That's what the Network of Disclosure believes and I agree with them 100% on that point.

 

Can I make that any simpler for you? You sound confused.

 

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is not pressing.

 

Oh, man. First the debate that pressing is not resto and now a new debate that pressing is not pressing . . .

 

[Red Hook]

Why not rejoin and help out? Instead of complaining?

 

You call it complaining. I call them constructive ideas on how you could be getting the word across better. If I were a member, I'd be saying the same things.

 

So you are privy to all discussions within NOD? You know for a fact that these specific topics have not been discussed?

 

Coming from someone who wants the entire debate to disappear, forgive me my cynicism.

 

I don't need to be privy to NOD discusses among its members to see what they do and don't do publicly, and it ain't much.

 

So if that's the case, why do you continually get your undies in a bunch over what they do or don't do? Sound like it's personal to me.

 

 

That says more about your cynical nature than the reality of the situation. I see an organization that wants to effect change, but isn't trying hard enough. I simply offered some constructive ideas. Anything beyond that was manufactured by your cynical imagination.

 

If I wanted the conversation to end, as you suggest, why would I be offering ideas for how NOD could succeed?

 

Because you don't want them to succeed. That's what's so bogus about your suggestions.

[Red Hook]

 

Well, if we haven't reached that point, why not examine what NOD could be doing to get there? That's the part of my post that you chose to ignore. Here it is again...

 

And if you really believe the word hasn't got out, why isn't NOD doing a better job of making that happen? Why isn't it setting up at shows? Why isn't it at least handing out flyers at shows? Who's wearing the "ask the question" T-shirts?

 

You brought NOD into the discussion.

[nearmint]

 

Well, if we haven't reached that point, why not examine what NOD could be doing to get there? That's the part of my post that you chose to ignore. Here it is again...

 

And if you really believe the word hasn't got out, why isn't NOD doing a better job of making that happen? Why isn't it setting up at shows? Why isn't it at least handing out flyers at shows? Who's wearing the "ask the question" T-shirts?

 

You brought NOD into the discussion.

 

"Why NOD isn't doing more" is a separate discussion from "convincing everyone that pressing is resto". We're multitasking here, Brad. Try and keep up.

[DrWatson]

 

Thank you.

 

You chose to interpret what you thought he said in your own way. There is a world of difference.

 

You are more than welcome, but could you please explain to me then who the intended audience is if the purpose isn't to convince everyone that pressing is restoration. I understand there are people, such as yourself, that already believe this and therefore do not need convincing and are not included under the umbrella of "everyone."

 

I personally believe that some forms of pressing fall clearly under the category of restoration. I do not expect everyone to agree with me. I am not out to convince everyone that it is. All I want is to get the facts out in front of as many people as possible over time, and let them decide for themselves.

 

But I do believe that the disclosure of such practices is in the best interests of the buyer, the hobby and yes, the seller. That's what the Network of Disclosure believes and I agree with them 100% on that point.

 

Can I make that any simpler for you? You sound confused.

 

No, I am not confused. It just felt like we were arguing semantics.

[Red Hook]

 

Well, if we haven't reached that point, why not examine what NOD could be doing to get there? That's the part of my post that you chose to ignore. Here it is again...

 

And if you really believe the word hasn't got out, why isn't NOD doing a better job of making that happen? Why isn't it setting up at shows? Why isn't it at least handing out flyers at shows? Who's wearing the "ask the question" T-shirts?

 

You brought NOD into the discussion.

 

"Why NOD isn't doing more" is a separate discussion from "convincing everyone that pressing is resto". We're multitasking here, Brad. Try and keep up.

 

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. You brought NOD into the discussion. Now the evasion.

 

Do you or do you not want NOD to succeed?

[october]

[DrWatson]

That's a leap. I don't see any connection.

That is your opinion, which you are more than welcome to have. I don't feel the need to make everyone share my opinion if they don't want to believe the same way as I do.

 

It's not that I don't agree....it's that you haven't said why you think there's a connection. I'm all ears!

Here you go:

Pressing doesn't need to be defined as resto to move forward. Call it what you want. The process manipulates structural grade & the corresponding value. As long as buyers know about it...they can make an informed choice when making a purchase.

Just like Signature Series books. Which I picked up three of over the weekend.

Why do you continue to relate pressed books with SS books? Apples & oranges....

All joking aside, Chris. I can see how they are analogous to one another depending on someone's view point.

 

Huge difference....

 

The only purpose of the yellow label is to authenticate the signature, nothing more. However, I can see you are working the disclosure angle which is irrelevant when comparing the two assuming that the pressing is disclosed at the time of the sale. Both methods are used to increase the desirability and profitably of the book.

[MutantKeys]

[nearmint]

Why not rejoin and help out? Instead of complaining?

 

You call it complaining. I call them constructive ideas on how you could be getting the word across better. If I were a member, I'd be saying the same things.

 

So you are privy to all discussions within NOD? You know for a fact that these specific topics have not been discussed?

 

Coming from someone who wants the entire debate to disappear, forgive me my cynicism.

 

I don't need to be privy to NOD discusses among its members to see what they do and don't do publicly, and it ain't much.

 

So if that's the case, why do you continually get your undies in a bunch over what they do or don't do? Sound like it's personal to me.

 

 

That says more about your cynical nature than the reality of the situation. I see an organization that wants to effect change, but isn't trying hard enough. I simply offered some constructive ideas. Anything beyond that was manufactured by your cynical imagination.

 

If I wanted the conversation to end, as you suggest, why would I be offering ideas for how NOD could succeed?

 

Because you don't want them to succeed. That's what's so bogus about your suggestions.

 

You said it yourself, I left NOD because of a personality conflict. It was not because I have any problem whatsoever with disclosure. I practice it myself, for crying out loud.

 

I just believe that NOD could have a one-on-one sit-down with every collector on the planet, and it wouldn't make any difference in how the hobby operates. I just don't think there are enough collectors who are passionate enough about pressing to make any changes in their buying habits.

[nearmint]

Do you or do you not want NOD to succeed?

 

See my post above.