Stampchat+

Welcome!

Let's see if we can combine the "one room" concept of the earlier StampChat board with the technological advantages of true message-board software!

Here's the idea: Like the other StampChat board, there's just one destination to visit in order to read the latest discussion: this thread, or, technically, "topic". Everybody posts everything here. Follow-up comments are made here. Regular posts, like Jim W's "Today in Postal History" are made here. This is the "one room" concept.

However, several days later, a moderator will come along and "file" certain posts into the "StampChat Archives". Jim's posts will have a separate folder (or "forum", as it's called here). Any follow-up comments pertaining to his posts will be filed there as well. Lavar's posts and related comments would also "filed" into his own folder ("topic") in the archives, too.

Other topics that seem worthy of an archive folder can also get one as well.

The only drawback that the software imposes is that, when the post is filed into an Archive folder, it gets removed from the original thread. We haven't figured out anyway around this, but, if the filing is done a few days after the original discussion takes place, this may not be too much of an imposition.

Moreover, this software offers powerful research capabilities. You can ask it to find posts made by a certain author, using a certain keyword, in one "topic" or in multiple topics.

Thus, hopefully, this arrangement will combine the best of both worlds: the ease of use of a "one room" approach, coupled with some information organization and search capabilities.

Additionally, because of the one-time registration requirement, there is much more capability to prevent mischief by rogue posters. Finally, moderation will be performed in the background by an anonymous team.

I think this looks like a workable solution.

Please let us know what can be done to make it easier to use.

OK, so I got the 3/7 issue of Linn's, and they've assigned numbers to the New Years sheet. Get this. The sheet has been designated 3895. Fine. No problem. But only 11 of the 12 singles have been assigned minor numbers 3895a-3895k. The Year of the Monkey single has been assigned 3932a. Why? Because it's the sole stamp which is identical in all respects to the original single, (same design, same perfs, same denomination, same printer) except for the 2005 date. As such, Scott apparently requires it to be assigned a minor number of the original major variant, and not one of the souvenir sheet of which it's a part.

I dunno. There are rules, and then there are times when rules are just silliness. And it seems like one of these times.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greetings
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and an Indiana "Good Morning"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to you all.

I'm back from a week in Knoxville, TN. Hoping to get caught up soon.

Hey! I'll be at the March Party (Garfield Perry show in Cleveland) and I'm hoping to meet some of the folks I know via electronic means when I'm there. I don't get to go to this sort of thing often..... :)

Anyway, will any board members be there.. and, if so, anyone willing to meet and talk stamps/postal history for a while? I know Matt L and Ken S will be there. Others?

Rob

Rob, I got the following note from Vic (whose English isn't the best):


For those who want to see what we're talking about, I created an enlarged scan with arrows indicating the row of double-perfs. Warning - image is just under 500K. I also emailed Jim Kloetzel at Amos to see what he says about it.

Response from Jim Kloetzel (very quickly too, I might add):

Jaume, Jaume's friend, Dave F - many thanks! Help much appreciated!

They're going to print my question in Linn's "Collector's Forum" in 4-8 weeks. But for those who can't wait, the answer is that Scott considers the "front" to have calligraphy on the left, stamps on the right.

I'm just Mr. Answer Guy today.

Jim G: Thanks for sharing all the info here. I learn something new every day.

re: Chinese New Year, I don't recall what your take was on this: do you agree with this decision about what's front and what's back, and/or would a reasonable person, without any background information, be able to make a reasonable decision about this? (And do you still have a link you can post to the front and back?)

Thanks!

Richard W: I'm relieved that Jaume found someone who knew what they were talking about! Glad at least the board could be of help.

Dave, there is absolutely nothing on the sheet itself to indicate which is which, so any factors are strictly "external". I always believed that the front really was the front, because all of USPS's promotional literature displays the sheet with calligraphy on the left and stamps on the right. Clark (I think) disagreed, because the pane he ordered from the Cave arrived pre-packaged with the front showing calligraphy on the right and stamps on the left. So we had two "official" outside references with different conclusions - mine being "here's what they intended", and Clark's being "but here's what happened in production". I don't know what formed the basis of Scott's decision, but my guess would be that they know more about the proposal and design history of the issue than is immediately obvious.

I *do* disagree with their "Year of the Monkey" minor numbering - it's just silly to say that a stamp isn't a minor variant of the sheet from whence it came. I don't know of another such instance where a sheet got a major number and a stamp from that sheet got a minor number of a different issue. The very fact that the backing paper for the two singles is different should prevent them from being considered "the same". But backing paper doesn't carry much weight when it comes to Scott numbering - else there would be a lot more minor variants. This is probably because it's too easy to remove a stamp from its paper and stick it on different paper. Ah well.

As "Stamptrader" and "Blame Canada" both are listed with February 29, 2004 registration dates, I guess that today is the 1 year anniversary of Stampchat+.

Congrats.

Chip

jokeboy Thanks. I'll try to scan my copy as well. Very interesting information.

Rob

Hi Chip, officially the StampChat+ forum opened to the public on March 17th i think, so we're pretty close to the aniv. date

According to my memory the StampChat+ officially opened April 1 last year. When you look at the home page you will see the text: "Most users ever online was 17 on Mon Mar 08, 2004", the day a group of specially invited people took a first glance of the new chatboard. The day mauro mentions must be the day this chatboard was mentioned the first time on the other stamp chatboards.

The following link is to the ebay stamps forum where I have posted my question in post #862, responses so far span to #876.

http://forums.ebay.com/db2/thread.jspa?threadID=5862&start=840

Bud: Welcome!

To elaborate on his question, the mystery items concern Mexico, Ecuador, and another country I can't identify right off.

And Prometheus: Thanks for the recommendation over there on the other eBay board. This kind of word-of-mouth recommendation will help this board in a way that just posting an announcement in a newsgroup would not. Thanks!

Chip G., Mauro & Paul: Thanks for the reminder about the anniversary. It would have totally slipped my mind.

Budkeeton, Hi and welcome aboard!
Regarding your items, i haven't read the follow-ups to your post so please apologize if im repeating info.

- The mexican item is a Revenue not a postal stamp
- Ecuador set, don't have any info yet ... can´t remember it
- Black proof, looks like a Spanish Guinea aerogramme, but i don't have any spanish colonies catalogue here so can't help much now, probably any of the regular users of the EDIFIL catalogue will jump in and help with the ID
Regards

The proof is of an Equatorial Guinea 200Ptas souvenir sheet titled "Conquista Del Oeste" (possible a very neatly cut aerogramme). I have a copy of the regular issue (about 2.5" x 4", about), but was looking for some info & valuation of the proof. I noted years ago what I paid for it, but failed to note any identification.
Similar with other two items. I got the blocks from Mr. Columbus, who you are probably familiar with, but even the invoice didn't identify the Scott number. These are not standard catalog fare.
I will appreciate any information.

Hey! there he is! I don't think it's the same one we tried to send around. I never did hear if he got sent back to my nephew. :(

On the GOOD NEWS front: this same nephew gave me a call a few weeks ago (he is 9 year old) and said "I just got a new box of stamps...." And, away he went. Evidently the Christmas present found some fertile soil for a time. :)

It's fun knowing that I can send him practically anything stamp related and he'll like it.

Rob

I think not, Rob, as I was on the list and it never got to me.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greetings
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and an Indiana "Good Morning"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to you all.

Hmmm...

Just trying to remember exactly, when Flat Stanley made his rounds, didn't those of us who received him send post cards or some such to the classroom teacher as well as forwarding Stanley on his mission, or am I thinking of a different project?

So there must have been SOME response to his travels.

Flat Stanley made it to our house, as did a similar project from my own grandson. I've got a scan or two around here someplace as a reminder of Stanley's visit.

Dunc

Hi,
Although I've been a constant reader from the beginning, I just checked and it seems that I am about make my first post here. So here goes.
Does anyone know what the rate for a single sheet folded letter from Prescott, UC to Toronto, UC would have been in December 1854?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Terry

This information is from the third-reich stamps mailing list.

There appears to be a number of forgeries of the BPP signature of Mr Jäschke-Lantelme on Ebay.

Further details may be found on :-

http://www.forum.phila-studio.de/viewtopic.php?t=35
(this is in german)

Terry, Rate was 3d in 1854 (the standard domestic rate at the time).

Blame Canada,
Thank you.
Terry

hey Duncan
Thansk for your post on the other board about holey stamps
I might have found something good because of the info you provided

Decided to get a taste of a different religion this weekend



Gonna lick a witch

Well Prometheus, I hope you post pictures of your find.

The "holey stamps" Pro mentions were discussed at Richard Frajola's board; "Douglas Patent" security stamp paper was discussed, and a couple different images of "holed" papers were posted. Here's one example, if you look closely you will see that the stamp surface has a thin top layer of paper with holes in it, so that two separate layers of paper were inked forming the complete stamp image.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/2 ... egreen.jpg

The stamp is a variety of US Scott #207.

Dunc

"Toilet out of order. Please use floor below."

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Greetings
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and an Indiana "Good Morning"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to you all.

Hi Mauro. Can you tell from this scan if these overprints are OK? TIA Mike in NYC / meostamps

Uruguary airmail O/P's

Hi Mike!
They look fine =)

Regards

Thanks Mauro. Had not seen them before so wanted your opinion. Will list them for auction on Stamphead if anyone needs them. Best regards & THANKS again. Mike in NYC / meostamps. PS Stopped at the Mega Show in NYC last night. Had the opportunity to meet Richard Frajola. A wonderful experience with an outstanding gentleman.

Good morning/afternoon/evening to you all.

K.E.