Poll: Writing On Stamps

If it's Carroll Chase, yes...

Seriously though, I voted yes but would add, as long as it doesn't affect the front of the stamp.

I don't collect MNH stamps so the back has less impact on me.

I hit view-results prior to voting, so now I can't vote. Yes, I'm dumb.
My take is the same as stampcrow's. I'm a yes - for used stamps only, and only where there is real value-add by doing so. Chase is a good example.

Depends on who is doing the writing and what it means ------Putting a catalog number or ownership is wrong . A expert signing his name or writing forgery is OK. As stated above nothing should show thru the stamp .

I'm OK with an expert's mark, less so with an owner's or dealer's mark. Writing a number or other notation lightly in pencil I don't particularly like, but I'll tolerate it (a soft gum eraser can take care of it if necessary). What I really don't understand is when I come across a catalog number or such thing written in ink. Why? Tut-tut.

I'm in the "NO" category.

While I can understand it having been done in the past, with the lack of resources, both for showing stamps, mounting them and describing them limited to what was usually locally available, that is no longer the case.

There are plenty of ways to mount stamps, whether it is on Steiner pages, Scott or other album pages or on personally created pages. You also have the options of glassines, various clear acetate style mounting pages, mounts and hinges, so determining a way of annotating information about the stamps should no longer require anyone to be writing on them.

If they are in your collection, annotate anything you need where you mount them or hold them until having time to mount them. If you are disbursing a collection, get a glassine and write all over it, attach it to a printout of your notes, but don't write on the stamp!

I think I've made my point, so I'll stop pontificating and climb down off my soap box.

The last word: We don't own these stamps, we are but the caretakers for the next generation...

I am in complete agreement with the above post. No writing on the back of stamps from this moment onward please.

I sometimes put the perf variety on the back of the stamp, in light, soft pencil. Otherwise I might end up having to check them all over again.

I am a resounding NO.

I buy and sell older British Colony stamps and I can't tell you how many beautiful stamps with perfect centering and excellent perfs come with writing on the back.

It is my personal mission to request that everyone who writes on the back of a stamp take them to their grave so the rest of us don't have to deal with them. (Just kidding, but it really does bother me.)

The worst are the ones that have a handstamp of a previous owner marked on the back of the stamp.

If you have to take notes, consider mounting the stamps on a page and them make your notes on the page. It works and doesn't deface the stamp. Remember, we are just storing stamps for the future owners, so please take care of them.

I voted No. I don't like it when someone writes on a stamp that is for a collection.

I frequently see perf designations, colors, and catalog numbers written in pencil on older stamps. Oddly enough, many times the note is incorrect.

I do not write on backs but not as adamant about it. In my opinion more harm is done by hinging stamps than writing on back of used stamps. If it is a used stamp with some hinging already, it does ot bother me at all. On higher value stamps, marks should be disclosed since it is a criteria for some.

I'll go with option #3: it depends on the type of pen used.

If it is light pencil / graphite, then it is perfectly OK and sometimes even recommendable practice. Light graphite markings are easy to erase (or soak) away, and do zero damage to stamp. Even hinging causes more damage to pulp...

But put any type of permanent writing (such as ink) on stamp, and I see red

-k-

I vote no. I often write a number on a hinge however.

I voted "yes" because I would happily buy a stamp with writing on the back. However, I would never do it, largely for fear of tearing the stamp or having the writing show through the front. It also makes finding watermarks even harder.

Don

I voted a qualified "yes". The marking should only be done in soft (HB, B, or softer) lead with a light hand. There are erasers manufactured today which can easily remove these marks with no fear of damage...if used correctly.

And, marking should only be done to clarify what is not reasonably apparent. This could be sheet position,, or plate variety.

I have not marked a stamp in years, since my specialized collections are in albums, or on vario sheets. All of the notations are on the pages, or on tiny pieces of paper.