Scott 594 Or 596 ?

cjpalermo1964, I don't believe that anything that I said stated that Clark should change a thing. I did state that his replies were above the level of understanding of the Original Poster. I tried to impart the idea that us non-experts could bridge the gap of understanding by "translating" jargon laden information into something that the Original Poster would most likely be able to understand. Of course, Clark does have the option of simplifying his responses if he wants to.

If Clark simplified his replies, then the more advanced students would miss out on higher level information. This is where his students can bridge the gap of knowledge so that everyone of all levels of understanding can benefit.

Nobody is at fault. I just want to encourage a positive atmosphere where the Original Poster of every thread is presented with information that they can understand. At the same time, I encourage contributors of every thread to introduce knowledge to everyone regardless of skill level.

The experts and other very knowledgeable members here are gracious enough to present us with valuable information. The least that we can do is to try to "translate" that information so that the Original Poster can have their question answered in a manner that they can understand.

Remember these posts are kept forever and many different readers of different levels will be referring to the post for years to come. It's better to have plenty of information than not enough.

In my opinion Clark should not change a thing in his responses. Simplified replies often are questioned and do not allow those who want to learn the opportunity. We should be grateful that we have experts willing to donate their time to this forum. Asking them to walk a new hobbyist through each step seems to be asking a lot from them.

This forum also contains misinformation (I notice this mostly on threads regarding color of stamps). I think in the 'race' to reply or be helpful some folks post incomplete or misleading information. We should 'reward' those folks who take the time to accurately, and in full detail, reply to the questions raised.
Don

There was nothing wrong with this thread and the posts until it was driven off-track by suggestions that the posts weren't appropriate.

The first three responses gave all information the OP needed:

Use a perf gauge
632 all around

And then Clark was kind enough to elaborate on why a perf gauge isn't really needed.

Seems perfect to me.

My responses have been completely misconstrued and misinterpreted.
Apparently nobody else thinks like a teacher.
I opened the can of worms.
Please consider the can now shut, unless the original poster has follow-up to his initial question.

John Becker, your responses and the beneficial intention of them are not lost nor misconstrued nor misinterpreted by everyone. I find your replies to this thread as valid and very helpful.

In an indirect manner, others share the same sentiment and agree with your assessment. I do find that your posts are very valid and helpful.




You highlight what I see as a very important distinction of helpful vs. non-helpful responses to new/inexperienced collectors. We all started off with an incomplete understanding of any of the numerous topics. You tried to present information at a level that seemed appropriate for the OP. I applaud your efforts.

About 8 months ago I was posting questions that could be viewed as embarrassing for a collector. Due to the information provided by the members on this site and my own research, I am now a contributor that is taken seriously. The main point is that we should never discount a new member and should always encourage them to accumulate knowledge.

John Becker, I appreciate your insight and I believe that we all should incorporate it into how we interact with everyone. New members and experts alike. I envision an ideal for this forum where judgment is only necessary so that we can present information in a manner that is best understandable by an OP.

Your desire that we should all be impartial and objective teachers is not lost to me. I share your ideas and will do my best to impart them.

I still don't quite agree. It would be desirable to create a tutorial on the site for new collectors. I don't believe that suggesting use of a perforation gauge is very effective and suggestions to measure the height or width of a stamp with a ruler is bound to fail. No one would expect a new collector to understand that the perf 11 in a perf 11 x 10 1/2 rotary is not the same as perf 11 on a flat plate stamp. It would be a stretch to call a perforation gauge a measuring device.

While it might have helped to include some images in the initial post, time does not allow that. Having a prepared and vetted set of posts to point to could save a lot of time. Also, some of the early responses suggesting use of a perforation gauge were not very helpful. I believe looking at the stamp first is the most helpful;

1. Are the margins large or small?
2. Is the color bright or dull and if multiple stamps, do the colors vary?
3. Is there setoff (ink) on the back of the stamp? (The term offset is incorrect.)
4. Look at the perforations and coil edges. Are they rough or smooth?
5. If multiple stamps, do the perforations match side to side, top to top or top to side?
6. If multiple stamps, are the stamps the same size? (A picture of an overlay test is needed.)

There is no substitute for actually looking carefully at stamps. A perforation gauge is a handy adjunct, but may not be definitive.

It seems totally unreasonable to ask a new collector to use a perforation gauge without some training or a background in science or engineering.

Clark

That is what was so great about the 1847usa webpages. It had the stamps but it also had the articles on measuring perforations, coils, and many other beginner necessities. I've always thought this site should have a beginners starting area that includes similar articles to get them up to speed.

Without "stickys" or a special forum how do you direct a newby to any kind of basic training place?

1847bill,
You used the past tense in your post regarding the 1847usa web site. It is up and running at this link now
http://www.stampsmarter.com/1847usa/index.htm
Don

Right you are and I apologize for that. There is a wealth of information there and a great place to start.

It sounds like Stamp Smarter stepped in ans saved 1847USA (Thanks StampSmarter!) When did this happen?

Jack Kelley

Jack,
The site was ported a week or two ago. Bob graciously turned over the original content so it could be preserved and Stamp Smarter is hosting it. We are going through all of the pages (424 of them!) and updating any broken links and updating the search feature. Those pages which have been updated have the blue background. I am working to get through the balance of the pages in the next week or so.

Thanks should go to Bob and Bill Weiss for getting the content exchanged. Also to 'I Brake For Stamps' for helping with finding the broken links and a number other forums members for their hosting donations. Our objective was to keep this great resource online and available to all.
Don