Question About #13, 10c Green Type 1?

A couple of guys overheard at my local stamp club last week...



Don

Reedededge, You are once again wrong about what I am intending to accomplish. Despite the fact that all previous posters were correct about the stamp being a Type I, they failed to mention, and god forbid I wager on how many because they didn't know, that the stamp was very easily identifiable. Shame on me for pointing out that the answer was easy and all you have to do is figure it out. Shame on me also for not handing everybody the answer on a ing silver platter. My knowledge comes with a considerable investment of time and money. Excuse me if I have the audacity to urge collectors to follow in my footsteps. If you are looking for something other than your own greatness to save the hobby, you should encourage more collectors to be exactly like me because I have been a serious presence in my area of collecting for a lot of years and hopefully for a lot of years to come.

Bud, I should be able to give you plenty to about as well. My New Year's resolutions didn't include any changes in the way that I post on SCF!!!

Sinclair, I don't doubt for one second, that you are extremely well-versed in this area, if not an expert. But as I recently told a "cantankerous" client of mine, who is a very accomplished surgeon, and one of the finest at his trade, your ability is top-flight but your bedside manner sucks. (Fortunately, he did not take himself so seriously, that he couldn't laugh it off with a shrug of the shoulders and move on)....

And to switch tracks for a second, thank you to William Crowe for getting on this forum and clarifying something that I was not aware of. It is experts like him that want to teach rather than insult that will move this hobby forward.

You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. I think there are very few active members of this forum that have dispersed more useful and FREE information than I have. I am sorry but Bill Crowe is not one of them. In fact, it is quite likely that he would not have posted in this thread if his cert was not part of the discussion, not that I am trying to take away from his participation in this thread or any others.




I doubt your surgeon client cares about bedside manner any more than I do but question his motives and how much he cares about his patients and see if he is so quick to just "shrug it off".

Sinclair, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the purpose of this forum to educate, disseminate information and share experiences? Your smugness and self-importance serves no purpose other than to discredit your obvious wealth of information which would be much better served without the former.

I guess that would depend on who you ask and whether they are being honest. The forum means different things to different people. Those that are in a position to help are a diverse group and participate for hugely different reasons. For the most part, it is only the people that are on the take that believe this is a place where you ask a question and the ones that have worked hard to acquire knowledge are supposed to dutifully give it up on someone else's terms.

As a new and relatively young collector. This exchange makes me sad. Those that help me/other newbies are revered

You must be a lot of fun at parties

Winston,
I know that you and I have never fully agreed on this topic but hopefully you do not think that I am 'on the take' in any way; I have dedicated huge amounts of time and effort to the idea that sharing knowledge helps philately.

I would like to offer the suggestion that you and I are not all that different on this topic. To begin with, I think that there is a subtle but important distinction between sharing knowledge and sharing information. Sharing information is straight forward and occurs when someone gives another person the 'answer'. But sharing knowledge occurs when folks are truly interested in helping other hobbyists develop a new learning process.

Helping other hobbyists is one of the great features about this community; many folks here love to assist fellow hobbyists in learning about their stamps and how best to identify them. But I would agree that the primary intent of the community is not to be a free, personal appraisal service. I occasionally resist sharing information if I feel a person is taking advantage of the community and others; simply seeking 'free information' without applying any effort to learn. But I always share knowledge (if I can) when a person demonstrates an interest in learning. For me, sharing knowledge isn't about giving or getting something from others but rather it gets to the heart of what it means to be human. It is through learning that we can extend our ability to re-create ourselves, to offer something that it a part of life. Dalai Lama once said, "Share your knowledge. It is a way to achieve immortality." So just like helping a child with their homework, simply giving folks the answer (sharing information) does not achieve the objective of sharing knowledge and helping someone learn.

I think that you also believe this; based upon your posts seem to want to help others to learn but you tend to resist simply giving others the answer. You have previously made it clear to me that you have invested significant amounts of time, effort, and money in gaining your knowledge and I respect this. But the information world around us has changed and for philately to be competitive we have to also change if we want to attract future generations of collectors. I do not think that stamp collectors resist change; but they can indeed resist being changed. And in this 'Google age' I think that we should be careful about losing our desire to help others learn to learn.
Don

I don't get it. We were supposed to provide all the details and answers?
But you beat the teach the student to do their own research drum (Which I agree with and is why my response is what it is).

Of course not.




But your post is not helpful at all. You give a somewhat spongy identification of the stamp and do nothing to get the OP started. My response tells the OP what the stamp is AND gives a valuable hint that one of the keys to identifying the stamp is not where he or everybody else appears to be looking.

Sinclair201-- I appreciate that your supposed vast and deep knowledge came at great cost, time and effort, I really do. But it seems clear you have trouble sharing that knowledge without adding dollops of arrogance and condescension. Too bad for the rest of us, but mostly for you. Sad, really.

Well, despite the unnecessary nastiness, I have received an education about accurate type identification, as well as plating this stamp. Don, I also linked to Stampsmarter for further info, so thanks for that insight. It is a resource that I will make a point of using more consistently moving forward. For the record, this is not a stamp that I own, or even contemplated buying; I had absolutely no skin in the game. I had my suspicion that the right shell may have been enhanced, questions about the incompleteness of the left shell, and was wondering what the view of Crowe certificates were across this forum. I did not intend on rocking the boat or starting a ruckus.

Reedededge::

Two book suggestions for you. A good general set is the three volume Brookman work on 19th century US Stamps and Mort Neinken's work on just the 10C 1855-57 stamps. Both are available in PDF form for free from the US Philatelic Classics Society. There are other books in PDF form available, but they can get complicated for a general collector. I believe that StampSmarter may also have the Brookman set. I am more familiar with the Classics Society which is why I cite them first.

You have my e-mail address on the certificate and I will be happy to try to answer any questions you may have.

Just seconding Bill Crowe's recommendation of the Brookman and Nienken books. If you are not already a member of the USPCS, I would highly recommend joining. If you need someone to sponsor your application, send me an e-mail.