CGC census is high, but there aren't enough keys 5 5

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

5 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Hey RMA, I thought you didn't like this kind of conduct on the boards.  How come you aren't condemning it?

 

He does. I am anonymous. It is a conundrum.

[RockMyAmadeus]

13 minutes ago, GrumpyGus said:

This is a great example of his deflection tactics too. Besides intentionally misinterpresentng my post, he asks if we've ever thrown away a book, and when a good reason is given, he starts adding qualifiers. Before it was any comc, now its negligence vs accidental. Next it will be if you didn't report  your damaged comic to your insurance agent you're not a real collector.

Stu's post wasn't misrepresented in any way. In fact, it was Stu doing the misrepresenting. 

Look what Stu says here: "Before it was any comic, now its negligence vs accidental." 

But is that what I said? Let's look at what I said:

Quote

Have you ever thrown out a comic because, during the course of your "collecting", their condition deteriorated...because of your activities...to the point where they were no longer readable, at least without serious effort...?

Of course, then Stu and others respond with dishonest, bad faith questions like (I'm paraphrasing, here) "oh, so I guess if I spill my coke on them, or the cat pees on them, I'm not a collector, then, HUH??"

No.

"Well, if I display them in a heated, lighted room, I'm subjecting them to deterioration!"

Yes, in a very broad sense, having them displayed in a heated, lighted room contributes to their deterioration, SLIGHTLY. Obviously, however, the damage is slight, and wouldn't manifest itself...with proper care...for decades.

What is missed...as usual with Stu...is distinction.

If you toss your books on the floor, stepping on them, letting the cat pee on them, tearing them to bits and shreds...you're not a collector. You don't have any respect for the physical copies you're supposedly "collecting", regardless of your regard for the stories therein. 

So, no, it is not "negligence vs. accidental" where "before it was any comic"...it was NEVER "any comic", from the time I first stated it.

It's pretty simple: if you're a collector, you take care of your books, accidents or no. If you're not a collector, you don't, and leave them littered all over the floor for the cat to pee on. It's not about "condition", it's not about "grading"...it's simply about taking reasonable measures to prevent further deterioration (in whatever condition it was when you obtained it), and if you don't do that...you're not a collector. You're just a hoarder/accumulator/reader/whatever. And that conforms with the very idea of what a "collector" is.

Not complicated. No qualifiers, nothing changed from the very beginning of that particular topic. Easy.

[sfcityduck]

 

Quote

 

   2 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Hey RMA, I thought you didn't like this kind of conduct on the boards.  How come you aren't condemning it?

 

He does. I am anonymous. It is a conundrum.

 

Or a sock puppet.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

5 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

I checked out the last 6 pages of his posts, and his history supports your conclusion that he's no comic collector.

Wait a minute.....what is a collector, and how do you define someone who is not a collector? What is your narrow definition of who/what a collector is, and who are you to judge? You don't know me. You are wrong. I read stuff and I buy stuff and things like that.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

8 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

I checked out the last 6 pages of his posts, and his history supports your conclusion that he's no comic collector.

My life reduced to 6 pages....

[sfcityduck]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It's pretty simple: if you're a collector, you take care of your books, accidents or no. If you're not a collector, you don't, and leave them littered all over the floor for the cat to pee on. It's not about "condition", it's not about "grading"...it's simply about taking reasonable measures to prevent further deterioration (in whatever condition it was when you obtained it), and if you don't do that...you're not a collector. You're just a hoarder/accumulator/reader/whatever. And that conforms with the very idea of what a "collector" is.

 

A "collector" does not need to "prevent further deterioration" to be a "collector."  You can collect to read a comic over and over, causing deterioration, because your collecting focus is "reading" not "investment" or entombment or preservation.  This is really simple stuff.  Many, really, most collectors in the 1970s and 1980s I knew bought comics off the stand, and then read them over and over, deteriorating the grade, but enjoying the stories immensely.  

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

8 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

 

Or a sock puppet.

Hey....wait a minute....you just hold on there, buddy.

[sfcityduck]

5 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

Wait a minute.....what is a collector, and how do you define someone who is not a collector? What is your narrow definition of who/what a collector is, and who are you to judge? You don't know me. You are wrong. I read stuff and I buy stuff and things like that.

Good enough.  If you seek out, buy, and hold comics because you love comics, I withdraw my comment.  No need to talk about them on a message board.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

8 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Good enough.  If you seek out, buy, and hold comics because you love comics, I withdraw my comment.  No need to talk about them on a message board.

There you go, with the caveat "....or people give you comics because they know you like them.....".

See? Detente and Fragile Accord reached. Now, let's join hands and attack Stu.....

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

5 minutes ago, GrumpyGus said:

More deflections  You're definition of collector is wrong, plain and simple. Suck it up buttercup.

Come inside now......

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

6 minutes ago, GrumpyGus said:

Best post I've read today.

What's weird is I know RMA actually reads comics. It's the reasn I can't understand why he's basically saying that if you read your comics you're not a collector.

Because you read but don't comprehend what you are reading? That would be my guess, based on your comments so far concerning his opinions.....and because you are you.

[RockMyAmadeus]

11 minutes ago, Mr.Mcknowitall said:

15 minutes ago, GrumpyGus said:

Best post I've read today.

What's weird is I know RMA actually reads comics. It's the reasn I can't understand why he's basically saying that if you read your comics you're not a collector.

Because you read but don't comprehend what you are reading? That would be my guess, based on your comments so far concerning his opinions.....and because you are you.

Yeah, that's a good example of the deliberate, bad faith misrepresentation of people like Stu. Nobody said anything even remotely like he's suggesting. You can easily see the twist that he applies to invent something that no one said, and then argue against that. 

It's an easy Venn diagram.

Not all readers are collectors.

Not all collectors are readers.

Some readers are collectors.

Some collectors are readers.

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 minutes ago, GrumpyGus said:

No false misrepresentation here, since I went to the RMA School of Posting.  I covered my butt by saying "basically". Sure I didn't quote you exactly (your favorite deflection) but you implied it, said it in not so many words, and the narrative of your posts leads the reader to the logical conclusion. I learned from you to always leave myself an "out". Basically that's it.

Stu didn't even get the gist of what I said correct. It's misdirection, sleight-of-hand, to pretend that he was covered by saying "basically." No, "basically", I never said anything remotely like that, in any sense of his suggestion. Most collectors are readers. Many readers become collectors. Most readers, however, are not collectors, and never have been. That does not mean...in any way...that I'm "basically saying that if you read your comics you're not a collector." That's not even remotely true.

Stu is correct, though, when he says "no false misrepresentation" on his part. The reader can sort out that triple negative if they'd like.

Edited August 24, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus

[VintageComics]

5 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

5 hours ago, VintageComics said:

My understanding of the entire discussion was about how many collectors there were in the early days. That is where the thread went off on a tangent.

No.

Sorry, so it's not how many collectors there were. It was how active fandom was.

[VintageComics]

4 hours ago, GrumpyGus said:

Classic strawman argument. Irrelevant.

The answer is no. Does that make me a collector then?

I have driven to my LCS once a week every week for 20 years to pick up my Pull List.. I order comics from Previews every month. I read all my comics before the next batch arrives, and I'm not a collector?  I'm more of a collecter than the jackholes who flip through 20 copies looking for a 9.8, immediately put it in a Mylar4 and won't let the cashier touch them. That's "realistic".

Sorry, you are no longer a collector so your collector card has been revoked. You must now apply for an official reader card.

 

[jimjum12]

11 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

  4 hours ago, GrumpyGus said:

Classic strawman argument. Irrelevant.

The answer is no. Does that make me a collector then?

I have driven to my LCS once a week every week for 20 years to pick up my Pull List.. I order comics from Previews every month. I read all my comics before the next batch arrives, and I'm not a collector?  I'm more of a collecter than the jackholes who flip through 20 copies looking for a 9.8, immediately put it in a Mylar4 and won't let the cashier touch them. That's "realistic".

Truth to Power  …...Do it Daddy  GOD BLESS....

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[DavidTheDavid]

Ultimately, RMA’s strict standard for defining a collector lacks the nuance to encompass the range of collecting habits people have experienced themselves or observed in others. Still, it’s a reasonable assertion that habits such as preservation, organization, and actively searching for comics, an interest in creators, and so on are signs of a “collector” in some more formal sense. We might call these people “serious collectors.”

I find my father’s coin collecting habits odd as he knows very little about coins, doesn’t seek out information, can’t speak to coin production, and so on. But he slowly expands his minor coin collection; he’s also a quasi-precious metals guy.

I was a comic reader, but I think I’d call myself a collector once I was bagging and boarding and seeking out back issues.

[VintageComics]

25 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Ultimately, RMA’s strict standard for defining a collector lacks the nuance to encompass the range of collecting habits people have experienced themselves or observed in others. Still, it’s a reasonable assertion that habits such as preservation, organization, and actively searching for comics, an interest in creators, and so on are signs of a “collector” in some more formal sense. We might call these people “serious collectors.”

I find my father’s coin collecting habits odd as he knows very little about coins, doesn’t seek out information, can’t speak to coin production, and so on. But he slowly expands his minor coin collection; he’s also a quasi-precious metals guy.

I was a comic reader, but I think I’d call myself a collector once I was bagging and boarding and seeking out back issues.

In the more broad discussion, the tangent started when there was a disagreement as to how large fandom was.

So we're trying to determine how active fandom was by trying to ascertain how many collectors there are.

But fandom is made up of many types of collectors, with readers being one of the most popular kind...because up until the CGC era, MOST collectors were almost always readers first.

But more to my point, you don't even have to be a true collector to have an involvement in fandom.

If you were just a reader, and chucked your books away after you read them you definitely weren't a collector but could still be a part of fandom.

I find it ironic that now there are people who are stringently defining what a collector is but that you don't necessarily need to be a collector to be involved in fandom.

This is another reason why I think the discussion has gotten silly.

[sfcityduck]

I think this thread has officially played out far beyond any hope of redemption.  My apologies for my part in that.

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 hours ago, jimjum12 said:

Truth to Power  …...Do it Daddy  GOD BLESS....

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)