Does Philately Have More 'Self Interest' Than Other Hobbies?

IMHO, most philatelists that participate in online forums are willing to share. They take pride in building sites in which they share their experience and knowledge, happy to see someone finding a rare stamp. Preventing others from building a better collection doesn't make your collection better, and I do hope that a normal collector doesn't measure his value only by comparing his collection to others.
I collect WW in the lower bar of CV, so I'm even less competitive about my collection because I know I won't reach an amazing collection in my lifetime, and so far no one volunteered his lifetime to me.
For me, this forum is number one in sharing and helping each other.

Compare the size of an antique, or other, car, to the average sized stamp. Many people can see cars at a car show. Unless one uses now available technology, viewing a stamp is a one person-at-a-time event.

roadrunner, the use of modern technology, online catalogs and shows, makes the stamps available to view for many people at once.

This took a left turn. This is not about viewing stamps, it is about sharing information such as research and findings. No?

The very existence of this forum shows the willingness of sharing information.

I do not think that my original post said or implied that there is no sharing of information. I feel that the knowledge/information loss that occurs daily/weekly/annually as hobbyists pass without sharing what they know is one of the greatest sins our hobby. Some folks wait thinking that 'one day' they will share, perhaps in presentations, articles, or even a book. But others firmly believe that they paid a lot for their 'education' and others that come along behind them can 'pay their dues' just like they did.

But re-visiting the same data over and over with each generation of collectors is inefficient and wasteful. How many times does the hobby need to visit plating a stamp? How many times does the hobby need to revisit papers? A lot of topics have been given a 'deep dive' repeatedly over time, replicating the same work only because the original work was not readily available but also difficult just to find its existence.
Don

Let me put it this way.

I enjoy the topics here that have to do with "is it genuine" questions. Much to be learned in these topics. That being said there are those that respond by asserting that an item is a forgery and post a picture of similar items that they own marked as forgeries. No explanation as to why it is fake or what details and characteristics give it away. Hrad to learn anything from that. But often others will jump in and offer detailed visual and verbal explanations of what to look for. I often wonder if the "picture" responder knows more and is reticent about sharing the details. Perhaps they are just poor communicators. Who knows. If the "picture" poster is holding back that is a shame.

I bring up this example because what an amazing resource a consolidated/crowdsourced, detailed and searchable database of fakes and forgeries would be and it seems possible in this day and age. And yet it is a real chore to track down such information. Lots of searching brings outdated, poorly executed websites that hold pieces of the puzzle. Or you look through the usual suspects that are good for what they have but are very limited in scope given the scope of our hobby. Take the "picture" posters images and add the detailed explanations offered by others and you start to really have something. Now imagine that in one site visit instead of trying to ferret out that information from a forum topic that is years old.

Perhaps if the bones of the thing were in place people would contribute. It is just such a time heavy thing to accomplish and you need the IT skills along with the knowledge and love of the hobby to make it all comprehensible.

I would love to see a financial titan of a philatelist set up a central clearinghouse for philatelic information or endow something like the APS/APRL with strong conditions as to how the money is used. I am a APS member and enjoy it but find that it falls short when it comes to accessing the information that they are custodians of. It needs to be E-A-S-Y. Learning about stamps can be a daunting task as you advance and making access to information could only serve to grow the hobby.

"Yet in philately I have had people tell me, 'I spent years learning stuff and I am not about to turn around and share it'."

I've never met any collector who would not share there 'expertise'.

But if the question is how come collectors with specialized knowledge do not share that expertise via articles, publications and participation in shows, etc. That is another question entirely.

I agree with one of the comments above that collectors are generally introverts who enjoy to the hobby in their lair. But these same people will answer any question WHEN ASKED. As an introverted collector writing a article risks getting criticized or minor error being publicly discussed and embarrassed.

Stepping forward and publishing your finding and knowledge for all the world to see is high risk. It is even risky on this forum to make a mistake thus receiving much flak.

Car shows deal with hard facts ... philatelists often deal with opinion.

I can relate to what oldguy says.

I was initially quite apprehensive about posting my De La Rue study, but in reality, I'm happy to make mistakes and have them pointed out.

If I stop making mistakes, I'll stop learning!

I've made some howlers on numeral cancellations but it's almost a sense of relief to get the definitive answer on a particular problem.

rogdcam, as a compromise you can use existing platforms to build up an online database of forgeries:
1) Wikipedia - one can go in depth on the topic of forgeries. If I'm not mistaken, wiki has a dedicated subdivision like https://findyourstampsvalue.com/stampwiki/.
2) Deep blue - one can collaborate with that site and have the owner add one's info about forgeries. This site is limited to pre-1940 stamps, but that's where plenty forgeries took place.
3) I'm sure that there are more valuable sites that will gladly accept more info and even give credit.
So there's no need to start from scratch.

There was much that I agree with from the contributors; but I think that the bottomline is that a category like car is much more accessible than stamp. There may be a lot of stamps around but until you study them or at least take an interest of the scope that they cover it is only something to. be looked whereas everybody knows the romance of the car and you can take it out for a spin. But still I find ny solitary pursuit fulfilling.

Don - thanks for your follow-up post as I think it clarified your original thesis. I do not see myself ever writing an article or assembling an exhibit for the simple reasons that I don't believe I'm "good enough" and I have nothing I want to say. When writing on other topics for other channels, I have found that unless I have something that I feel is important and that my PoV might have an impact on others' thinking, I can't get anything to make sense "on paper". With stamps, I know more than someone who doesn't collect and more about specific areas that hole-fillers know, but not enough that I would be able to add a new insight to the existing body of published information. I suspect that I am not alone in my [un]motivation and observe that it has nothing to do with trying to hoard information.

I believe some are hesitant to record their knowledge because it is far, far easier to criticize the writings of others than to create original documents and publications of your own. It is frequently evident here. Egos get bruised. It often takes a thick skin to write - to overcome the lack of tact of some who revel in jumping on even the tiniest error.

I laughed at this one, the ironic spelling of "errata"!

(From Chaptal's "Chymistry Applied to Agriculture", 1840.

chymistry read chemistry

Looks OK to me.....

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.