Unknown Cancel On R167

Does anyone have the same cancel on a document or instrument, that can determine what Company this cancel belongs to? Or does anyone have actual information on this cancel?

Someone here might, but by 1898 there were many thousands of companies using stamps and finding a specific one on a document is like finding a needle in a haystack.

http://1898revenues.blogspot.com/se...and%20Hereth

Revcollector

Back in June 2013 I had sent an image to the 1898 Revenue Blog. I've been a member of this 1898 Revenue Blog for a few years now.

Was hoping perhaps someone on SCF might have knowledge or even an on document example.

Thanks for providing well known info that there was thousands of companies by 1898 using stamps.

Again Thanks!

Revcollector did the best he could with the information given. You gave no indication that you had already checked the best known online resource and came up empty. Rather than giving flippant responses to genuinely helpful advice, perhaps you could provide more useful information up front?

Brian

Rileysan

Reread my original! I ask for any information any body had on this cancel, or if anybody had an on document example.

Instead I received obvious information, but all Revenue Collectors already know!

What good does it mean to state I've already checked other places and came up empty, if I already had the information I was seeking, then why would I have asked?

Except for giving the 1898Revenue Blog site, which was helpful. What other more useful information could I have given up front? There seems to be something not stated with the SCF? What is it that I'm missing???

I'm sorry if my response was thought to be flippant, I do respect Revcollector input. I was looking for information, perhaps I stated my response wrong!

So do you have any information on this cancel?

Can you provide any background on this cancel?

Again, reread my original.

Revcollector

Let me ask you, do you think I was flippant in my response to your input?

If you do think I was flippant I want to say I'm sorry, and further will remove my self from SCF forever, as I do not want to appear to be negative any in way with other collectors. This is suppose to be a place to ask and give answers to back of book stamp questions.

Holy overreaction, Batman!

And I meant that towards both Rileysan and stampmaster. Rileysan's initial reaction comes off as harsh and confrontational, and the responding "I'll go away forever!" bit is overly dramatic.

I don't think stampmaster was intending to poohpooh Bart's reply.

We're all interested in the pursuit of knowledge and enjoying the hobby. Shall we?

Revenuecollector

I was asking for information, but and I shout out to everybody, if you do not have specific or actual information, then how does this reflect interest in the pursuit of knowledge and enjoying our grand hobby.

If I offend, then let me know, and I will remove myself from the SCF!!

Perhaps, but I think it was spot-on. Here's why ...






Was I wrong in my assessment of this comment? To me it reads as sarcastic, if not rude - akin to saying "Thanks for stating the obvious!"

The next statement isn't much better ...






Totally and completely untrue. I have a large collection of 1898 Documentary stamps and only ever used the Scott catalogue to research them. I have never heard of the website Revcollector shared with us, and am happy to learn about it today.




This was well-stated. If a question is asked, and no background information is given, then obvious responses like "Have you checked 'x'" are warrented - not just for the original poster, but for all who might read the thread.

Since I commented on it, I will help stampmaster by suggesting a better way of asking the question:

"I would like to know if anyone has any information about this cancellation. I would like to identify the company who created it and if it is common, uncommon, or rare. If anyone has examples to show, I would love to see them. I have checked the following resources without success:(1898revenues.blogspot, etc)"

Brian

Stampmaster, it appears to me that English may not be your primary language. If so, I apologize. Your questions/responses seem harsh to me, but it just might be a translation problem.

SCF and members, I'm sorry I was flippant.

English is my primary language.

Seems only proper to me that I should remove myself from SCF, sorry I have to go, as I have learned some good information here in just a short stay, but I do not want to cause problems with other members.

So effective now, I'm removing myself from all association with SCF, sorry I was such a FLIPPANT person!

I'll echo revenuecollector;



Didn't sound as though anyone was asking anyone to leave.

This has all the makings of a classic melodrama and I get to be the villian. Fun!

(Just so no one misses it - I was being flippant)

BRIAN --
Rut-row....seems Im usually in those shoes

We need a drama forum.

1)Not being psychic, I had no way of knowing whether you knew about that blog or not.
2) Not being psychic, I do not know your specific level of knowledge, especially since you have such a small number of posts until now.
3)Not being psychic, I tend to answer questions with the idea that many who read them are NOT specifically revenue collectors and may not actually understand the difficulties involved with some specific questions. My experience has frequently been that things which I consider obvious have NOT been obvious to other collectors, and vice versa.
Yes, I do think the answer was on the condescending side, but I would be disappointed if you felt you had to leave because of it.