Posted By:
JoannNo Mike - it wasn't at all meant as criticism. It comes up on this board occasionally that someone tries to provide context to the issue of mistakes in grading by pointing out that they comprise a very very small portion of the whole. I was only pointing out that the rate should be considered as to vintage cards only - if not by actual numbers then at least conceptually.
Truly, it was meant to add to the general discussion of mistakes and the context, not to criticize or single anyone out.
Joann