This is an interesting discussion about the value of information. Over the years I've studied various areas of this hobby in great depth, developing an expertise along the way. Once I became an active member of this site, I made a decision that I would share that information with other collectors.
One of my areas of speciality is rare baseball books. In 1995 I wrote a comprehensive article about them in VCBC. Many people told me at that time that they had never seen that area of the hobby discussed in such depth. It became a valuable resource for collectors from that point on. I never got paid for my work, and never expected much or anything in return. Likewise, if a queston about books comes up on Net54, I'm happy to help somebody in any way I can.
I'm still digesting Andrew's refusal to help with the project. I do understand that he has worked hard to learn about the T205 set, and to compile a checklist of all the known front/back combinations. And I realize that anybody can start a website, and then expect those who know more than them to fill in the blanks. I'm leaning towards the idea that information should be shared, especially for those who are active members of this site.
Collectors come here on a daily basis asking for help from other hobby experts, and I would hate to see people refuse to share what they know with others. Normally we help people with specific needs. Scholars write and publish articles all the time and anyone who reads them may use that information to further their own research.
So what's the answer? I don't know for sure. Maybe the OP needs to do a little more digging on his own and establish some credibility before asking others to fill in the missing information. But I'm a little uncomfortable with Andrew's hard nosed position too. Like I said at the start, this is about the value of information, and maybe each us puts a different worth on what we know and how we acquired it.
|