================= Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:13:23 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Aaron" Subject: Re: The January 2012 card count ramble Neat thing is... Ryan liked cards. And in his passing, he caused me to remember that one thing about myself as well. I hope many others were reminded of the joy we get from such simple pursuits. ================= To: "'OBC Ramblings'" Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 18:36:55 -0500 From: "Bob Donaldson" Subject: Pre-War Trading Got a number of pre-war dups that I'd be interested in trading for pre-war hits to my lists, or perhaps post-war cards that I really really want. Full T202s Just Before The Battle Meyers/Mathewson SGC 30 Caught Asleep of First Breshnahan/Harmon SGC 30 Birmingham's Home Run Turner/Birmingham F (small hole on fold) Schaefer Steals Second Griffith/McBride G Broken Up T202s Chance Beats out a Hit Chance/Foxen Chance Beats out a Hit Archer/Rowan The Athletic Infield Hauser/Konetchy Donlin Out At First Dooin/Magee Chase Ready for the Squeeze Play Magee/Paskert Cagle (FB?) Farrell (Actor) Lasman (FB?) Leonard (Boxing) Heeney (Boxing) 33 Goudey 1 Bengough F Frankhouse (back skinned) 96 Hudlin Vg except clip on corner 38 Goudey 244 Demaree G/Vg but w/ some creases Diamond Stars 24 Adams F 34 Hack G 51 Whitehead G 42 Dykes F 39 Playball (mostly F/P *=WOF) 4 vg, 4*, 11*, 28*, 97*, 100, 108*, 109*, 109 vg, 110 vg w/ notch on border, 111*, 108, 115* 41 Playball 47 f/g 41 Doubleplay (cut in half o/w vg+) 74 p, 75, 77, 83, 84. 88, 109, 120, 122, 139 27/28 f/G full card ================= Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 19:06:15 -0500 (EST) To: dugouttraders@yahoogroups.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, From: smartalecx@aol.com Subject: lincoln wheat pennies dozens of recent hits have reduced my wantlist and beefed up the dupe list somewhat. please let me know if there is anything here that you can help with, or that i can help you with. LINCOLN WHEAT PENNIES 1909-1958: need 09 VDB, 09 VDB S, 09S, 10S, 11D, 11S, 12D, 12S, 13D, 13S, 14D, 14S, 15S, 16D, 22, 22D, 23S, 24D, 24S, 25D, 25S, 26S, 27S, 28S, 31D, 31S, 32, 32D, 33D, 34D, 38S, 39D, 43 (steel rust free) Lincoln Wheat (pre-1959) Pennies available to trade: 19, 19S, 21 (2x), 24 (2x), 25, 28, 38, 40D, 41, 42, 43D, 43S, 44, 44S, 47D, 48D, 50, 51D, 52D (2x), 53, 53S, 54D, 56D (2x), 57D (6x), 58D Gary Mandell 3930 North Pine Grove Avenue # 3108 Chicago, IL 60613-5518 _http://gmcards.homestead.com/mywebpage.html_ (http://gmcards.homestead.com/) Member: OCT, OBC, DT, TB ================= To: Brian Lindholme , OBC Ramblings Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 23:05:39 -0500 From: Bob Reed Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] The January 2012 card count ramble I don't know about the number of cards but Yahoogroups lists the number of messages sent each month. In January 2012 there were 265 messages sent to obc-thanks@yahoogroups.com. That's a far cry from the high of 523 from February 2003. It is the third highest total since February 2009 though. Here's the chart. Hope it comes out OK. -Bob R To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: familytoad@comcast.net Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:25:29 -0800 Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] The January 2012 card count ramble OBC World, I always love it when mass mailings go out and then you get to follow along on the THANKS server for the great appreciations that are sent. Well 2012 has really started out with a bang, as there has been a TON of cardboard flying around. That's super cool. We'd be remiss if not noting that Ryan's auction and The Stamper Stampede weren't huge contributors to the great month we are It would take someone with more mathematical acumen than I have, but I wonder what the card count would be from John's big benevolent barrage, and Ryan's auction alone!!! That's my ramble...someone count them all up and let's beat it in February! OBC Forever ================= To: Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 16:58:44 -0500 From: "Gord Ellis" Subject: Icee Bear Basketball Does anyone know anything about this set? I understand that it is pretty tough to find. I picked up a lot of 12 and woulld like to know the value of commons I have Awtrey, Carr, DeBusschere, Frazier, Havlicek, Hawkins, Love, Lucas, Murphy, Robertson, Unseld, Wicks. I assume that Kareem, Maravich, Bradleyand Wilt are part of the set. I don't have any extras but would love to trade for what I'm missing. I have some '69/'70T, '70/'71T and some others to trade. Thanks. Gord Ellis ================= To: Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 19:17:05 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: last chance to get in on the superbowl pool I will be setting up the squares and pulling numbers in about 2 hours.... if you haven't let me know already, please do so. so far I have: Let me know if anyone else wants in. ================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 20:05:05 -0600 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: Mark Atnip All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com After I didn't get a response to my emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare "mystery solved". Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:56:50 -0800 (PST) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rittenberg From: Geno Wagner Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Steve -- I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we? You just go online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send something out and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated their address after moving. I figure maybe the new person livingthere might like the card! Take Care, --- On Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg wrote: From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com After I didn't get a response to my emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare "mystery solved". Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 22:19:35 -0500 (EST) To: brockhattox@cs.com, guysottile@gmail.com, battridge@kslaw.com, From: brockhattox@cs.com Subject: Change of email address I will soon cancel my Compuserve subscription. Please change my address to if you have not already done so. ================= To: Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 23:23:08 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: Your numbers are up :) The numbers have been randomly drawn by my son, and the squares are at: http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm Get those want lists up to date! Go OBC! ================= Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 22:41:43 -0600 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: Linda Fitak Has anyone heard from Linda Fitak recently? She's the last person I need to track down for the Membership poll. I see the last Thanks she posted was from August. I don't have a response to the email I sent her and I cannot find her on Facebook. I googled her name and I think I found her but I need to check and email/confirm. ================= To: "Bob Reed" , Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 22:37:36 -0800 From: "Brian Lindholme" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] The January 2012 card count ramble Cool chart Bob! Now we have another cardboard- inducing event happening on Sunday when New York and New England meet...its like the Red Sox and Yankees of Football!! I have my customary "unlikely to win " square numbers, but you never know! Thanks Sean for the opportunity...again! OBC Forever ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Reed To: Brian Lindholme ; OBC Ramblings Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:05 PM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] The January 2012 card count ramble I don't know about the number of cards but Yahoogroups lists the number of messages sent each month. In January 2012 there were 265 messages sent to obc-thanks@yahoogroups.com. That's a far cry from the high of 523 from February 2003. It is the third highest total since February 2009 though. Here's the chart. Hope it comes out OK. -Bob R 2012 265 3 2011 275 185 248 149 159 144 151 195 183 140 209 295 2010 246 170 126 172 236 183 215 196 152 185 162 205 2009 392 300 167 204 125 183 201 176 133 183 182 199 2008 251 275 254 177 163 167 242 273 222 220 261 357 2007 326 281 254 192 138 134 119 168 254 193 216 201 2006 329 239 233 193 205 223 291 221 177 234 249 251 2005 367 259 203 181 183 173 109 199 210 192 394 383 2004 366 354 275 216 326 375 295 184 259 218 257 329 2003 514 523 467 421 331 303 279 318 277 298 390 394 2002 517 412 309 358 320 326 249 296 328 429 328 510 2001 131 235 265 247 170 216 350 489 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: familytoad@comcast.net Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:25:29 -0800 Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] The January 2012 card count ramble OBC World, I always love it when mass mailings go out and then you get to follow along on the THANKS server for the great appreciations that are sent. Well 2012 has really started out with a bang, as there has been a TON of cardboard flying around. That's super cool. We'd be remiss if not noting that Ryan's auction and The Stamper Stampedeweren't huge contributors to the great month we are all having. It would take someone with more mathematical acumen than I have, but I wonder what the card count would be from John's big benevolent barrage, and Ryan's auction alone!!! That's my ramble...someone count them all up and let's beat it in February! OBC Forever ================= To: "'Geno Wagner'" , Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 14:06:52 +0000 From: "Hitzeman, Steven A." Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:03:27 -0800 (PST) To: "Hitzeman, Steven A." , From: EEK Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip I just went to the Who Collects What page to delete completed sets and add a others. I wasn't able to edit the page so I went to the handy tutorial pagethat Wayne Deliaset up (Great Job, Wayne) however the links to the Who Collects page all lead to the main page which is un-editable. I'm sure someone will have a very simple answer to this so allowme to add a preemptive:I'man "we keep what we give away!" From: "Hitzeman, Steven A." To: Geno Wagner ; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" ; Steve Rittenberg Cc: "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 9:06:52 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Can we update the who=E2=99s collecting what cards link? It would help all of us to send out our dups! From:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geno Wagner Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:57 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Steve Rittenberg Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Steve -- I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we? You just go online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send something and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated their address after moving. I figure maybe the new person living there might like the card! Take Care, --- On Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg wrote: >From: Steve Rittenberg >Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com >Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com >Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM >All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I >tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston >Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: >matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com After I didn't get a response to my >emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned >that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the >voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare >"mystery solved". >Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who >updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes >care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. >ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 12:13:14 -0500 To: EEK From: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Worked for me. This is what I did goto www.oldbaseball.com click on Directory click on Update your address of collecting goals click on Update OBC Profile Information select your name and enter password change your profile, including clicking on sets you collect click on update profile On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:03 PM, EEK wrote: > ** > I just went to the Who Collects What page to delete completed sets and add > a few others. I wasn't able to edit the page so I went to the handy > tutorial page that Wayne Delia set up (Great Job, Wayne) however the links > to the Who Collects What page all lead to the main page which is > un-editable. I'm sure someone will have a very simple answer to this so > allow me to add a preemptive: I'm an Idiot! > "we keep what we give away!" > ------------------------------ > *From:* "Hitzeman, Steven A." > *To:* Geno Wagner ; " > OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" ; Steve > Rittenberg > *Cc:* "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" > *Sent:* Fri, February 3, 2012 9:06:52 AM > *Subject:* RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip > Steve, > Can we update the who=92s collecting what cards link? It would help all of > us to send out our dups! > Thanks!! > Hitrz > *From:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto: > OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Geno Wagner > *Sent:* Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:57 PM > *To:* OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Steve Rittenberg > *Cc:* matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com > *Subject:* Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip > Steve -- > I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we? You > just go online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send > something out and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated > their address after moving. I figure maybe the new person living there > might like the card! > Take Care, > Geno > --- On *Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg * wrote: > From: Steve Rittenberg > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com > Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM > All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I > tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston > Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: > matnip@knoxvilleicebears.comAfter I didn't get a response to my > emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned > that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the > voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare > "mystery solved". > Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who > updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes > care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. > Steve > ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:56:13 -0800 (PST) To: Bob Donaldson From: EEK Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip It's affirmative, I'm an Idiot!Imissed a step. Thanks Bob! "we keep what we give away!" From: Bob Donaldson To: EEK Cc: "Hitzeman, Steven A." ; Geno Wagner ; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" ; Steve Rittenberg ; "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 12:13:14 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Worked for me. This is what I did goto www.oldbaseball.com click on Directory click on Update your address of collecting goals click on Update OBC Profile Information select your name and enter password change your profile, including clicking on sets you collect click on update profile On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:03 PM, EEK wrote: >I just went to the Who Collects What page to delete completed sets and adda >others. I wasn't able to edit the page so I went to the handy tutorial page >Wayne Deliaset up (Great Job, Wayne) however the links to the Who Collects >page all lead to the main page which is un-editable. I'm sure someone willhave >a very simple answer to this so allowme to add a preemptive:I'm an Idiot! >"we keep what we give away!" From: "Hitzeman, Steven A." >To: Geno Wagner ; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" >; Steve Rittenberg >Cc: "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" >Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 9:06:52 AM >Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >Can we update the who=E2=99s collecting what cards link? It would help all of us to >send out our dups! >From:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On >Behalf Of Geno Wagner >Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:57 PM >To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Steve Rittenberg >Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com >Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >Steve -- >I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we? You just go >online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send something >and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated their address after >moving. I figure maybe the new person living there might like the card! >Take Care, >--- On Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg wrote: >>From: Steve Rittenberg >>Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >>To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com >>Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM >>All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I >>tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston >>Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: >>matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com After I didn't get a response to my >>emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned >>that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the >>voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare >>"mystery solved". >>Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who >>updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes >>care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. >>ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 15:11:34 -0500 (EST) To: originaleek1@att.net, obcbobd@gmail.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Content-Language: en we never had any doubts In a message dated 2/3/2012 11:56:18 A.M. Central Standard Time, originaleek1@att.net writes: It's affirmative, I'm an Idiot! I missed a step. Thanks Bob! "we keep what we give away!" From: Bob Donaldson To: EEK Cc: "Hitzeman, Steven A." ; Geno Wagner ; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" ; Steve Rittenberg ; "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 12:13:14 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Worked for me. This is what I did goto _www.oldbaseball.com_ (http://www.oldbaseball.com/) click on Directory click on Update your address of collecting goals click on Update OBC Profile Information select your name and enter password change your profile, including clicking on sets you collect click on update profile On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:03 PM, EEK <_originaleek1@att.net_ (mailto:originaleek1@att.net) > wrote: I just went to the Who Collects What page to delete completed sets and add a few others. I wasn't able to edit the page so I went to the handy tutorial page that Wayne Delia set up (Great Job, Wayne) however the linksto Who Collects What page all lead to the main page which is un-editable. I'm sure someone will have a very simple answer to this so allow me to add a preemptive: I'm an Idiot! "we keep what we give away!" From: "Hitzeman, Steven A." <_hitzema@indiana.edu_ (mailto:hitzema@indiana.edu) > To: Geno Wagner <_illini_grad_90@yahoo.com_ (mailto:illini_grad_90@yahoo.com) >; "_OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) " <_OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) >; Steve Rittenberg <_srittenberg@gmail.com_ (mailto:srittenberg@gmail.com) > Cc: "_matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com_ (mailto:matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com) " <_matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com_ (mailto:matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com) > Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 9:06:52 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Can we update the who=E2=99s collecting what cards link? It would help all us to send out our dups! From: _OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) [mailto:_OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) ] On Behalf Of Geno Wagner Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:57 PM To: _OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) ; Steve Rittenberg Cc: _matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com_ (mailto:matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com) Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip Steve -- I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we? You just go online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send something out and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated their address after moving. I figure maybe the new person living there might like the card! Take Care, --- On Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg <_srittenberg@gmail.com_ (mailto:srittenberg@gmail.com) > wrote: From: Steve Rittenberg <_srittenberg@gmail.com_ (mailto:srittenberg@gmail.com) > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip To: _OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com) Cc: _matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com_ (mailto:matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com) Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: (http://us.mc1260.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?tomatnip@knoxvilleicebears.com) After I didn't get a response to my emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare "mystery solved". Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 13:41:08 -0800 (PST) To: Rob Fitts From: EEK Subject: www.BanzaiBabeRuth.com Just an FYI here, I received my copy ofBanzai Babe RuthMurder, Baseball, Espionage &Assassination last week. Haven'tstarted readingyet but I did check out the photo section. Very cool indeed! Even my wife was impressed andshe isn't impressed with much of any thing that doesn't havea Coach label! "we keep what we give away!" From: Rob Fitts To: OBC-Thanks@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 4:16:11 PM Subject: [OBC-Thanks] Re: Thanks to Richard Dingman Richard sends along 3 1962s including a colavito all star- all in nice shape. rob fitts Murder, Espionage & Baseball ================= Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 13:53:06 -0800 (PST) To: smartalecx@aol.com, obcbobd@gmail.com From: EEK Subject: I'm an Idiot! This does not bode well for my chances regardingmy recent OBCAC nomination.Actually I misquoted myself. "we keep what we give away!" From: "smartalecx@aol.com" To: originaleek1@att.net; obcbobd@gmail.com Cc: hitzema@indiana.edu; illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; srittenberg@gmail.com; Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 3:11:34 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip we never had any doubts In a message dated 2/3/2012 11:56:18 A.M. Central Standard Time, originaleek1@att.net writes: >It's affirmative, I'm an Idiot!Imissed a step. Thanks Bob! >"we keep what we give away!" From: Bob Donaldson >To: EEK >Cc: "Hitzeman, Steven A." ; Geno Wagner >; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" >; Steve Rittenberg ; >"matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" >Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 12:13:14 PM >Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >Worked for me. This is what I did >goto www.oldbaseball.com >click on Directory >click on Update your address of collecting goals >click on Update OBC Profile Information >select your name and enter password >change your profile, including clicking on sets you collect >click on update profile >On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:03 PM, EEK wrote: >>I just went to the Who Collects What page to delete completed sets and add a few >>others. I wasn't able to edit the page so I went to the handy tutorial page >>Wayne Deliaset up (Great Job, Wayne) however the links to the Who Collects >>page all lead to the main page which is un-editable. I'm sure someone will >>a very simple answer to this so allowme to add a preemptive:I'm an Idiot! >>"we keep what we give away!" From: "Hitzeman, Steven A." >>To: Geno Wagner ; "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" >>; Steve Rittenberg >>Cc: "matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com" >>Sent: Fri, February 3, 2012 9:06:52 AM >>Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >>Can we update the who=E2=99s collecting what cards link? It would helpall of us to >>send out our dups! >>From:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com]On >>Behalf Of Geno Wagner >>Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:57 PM >>To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com; Steve Rittenberg >>Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com >>Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >>Steve -- >>I don't know that we have a Keeper of the Directory anymore, do we?You just go >>online and make your own changes. I wonder sometimes when I send something >>and never hear anything if maybe that person never updated their address after >>moving. I figure maybe the new person living there might like the card! >>Take Care, >>--- On Thu, 2/2/12, Steve Rittenberg wrote: >>>From: Steve Rittenberg >>>Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip >>>To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com >>>Cc: matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com >>>Date: Thursday, February 2, 2012, 8:05 PM >>>All, in my quest to help George Vrechek with the membership poll, I >>>tracked down Mark Atnip. He's moved (Mark Atnip, 108 South Kingston >>>Ave., Rockwood, TN 37854) and has a new address: >>>matnip@knoxvilleicebears.com After I didn't get a response to my >>>emails and did not find him on Facebook, I googled him. I learned >>>that Mark is the voice of the Knoxville Ice Bears. I recognized the >>>voice but just couldn't quite recall who it was. I now I declare >>>"mystery solved". >>>Who is the keeper of the address list? And who is the person who >>>updates the OBC directory on the internet? I think Joe Isaac takes >>>care of the latter but I lost track of the Keeper of the Directory. >>>ps Mark: The link to your wantlist is not valid. ================= To: Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 22:18:58 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: "end of an era" Sorry this is not vintage related, but it will stand as my "twice a year UV interuption". The guy I buy my new topps cases from moved to Fla, and Topps didn't like his new address (not retail enough) so they pulled his account, after 30 years! I've been buying from this guy for nearly half that time! Point is, It doesn't look like I will be getting cases, so, if anyone does decide to buy a box, given the likely silly inflated prices over the squirrel, just as it happend over Bush/Mantle in '07 (was that 5 years ago!), you will not be able to buy from me :( (that was brutal sentence!) So, continue collecting the vintage stuff, and good luck if you are still going to try to open packs this year and going forward... heavy sigh :( Go OBC! ================= To: seanobc@comcast.net, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 09:44:07 -0500 (EST) From: Joshua Levine Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] "end of an era" Just as well...Topps customer service and promotions are awful and a joke. They lost their BBB rating (it now stands at an F) and they have an open file with the New York State Attorney General over the 2011 Diamond promotionbecause of bait and switch tactics and shipping costs, they also changed the rules in the middle of the promotion. I refuse to buy anything new from them going forward. This was a choice made earlier this year when they toldme and my 4th grade class that they are in a "business to make money not make kids happy"...seriously....WE know you are a business but you could have had some free PR and some new customers if you had bothered to listen to me and the students. Just shameful. -----Original Message----- From: Supreme Commander To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Fri, Feb 3, 2012 7:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] "end of an era" Sorry this is not vintage related, but it will stand as my "twice a year UV interuption". The guy I buy my new topps cases from moved to Fla, and Topps didn't like his new address (not retail enough) so they pulled his account, after 30 years! I've been buying from this guy for nearly half that time! Point is, It doesn't look like I will be getting cases, so, if anyone does decide to buy a box, given the likely silly inflated prices over the squirrel, just as it happend over Bush/Mantle in '07 (was that 5 years ago!), you will not be able to buy from me :( (that was brutal sentence!) So, continue collecting the vintage stuff, and good luck if you are still going to try to open packs this year and going forward... heavy sigh :( Go OBC! ================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 09:02:08 -0800 (PST) To: Joshua Levine , seanobc@comcast.net, From: EEK Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] "end of an era" "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore"!! I needa to vent my frustration here!I need to protest,much of my misspent youth was in the 60's & 70's so I know how to protest!I've thought of taking all of my UV commons that are taking up space and are not on any ones wantlist and ship them off to Topps. Of course Icould save a couple boxes for annual contributions the Cards for Kids campaign if that's still going on.Then againTopps probably stamp them with a gold number and use them as inserts in future sets sothey could put even fewer new cards in the packs. I guess I would have make Tiptons out of some, that would piss them off!Ormaybe I could write a scathing e-mail to Topps and send it every day or a couple times a day depending on my mood. There I feel a little better! I guess in reality I will continue to buy a few packswhen I'm in Walmart Target! I think it would be dangerous to stop opening packs cold turkey, better to wean off slowly. I'll probably pick up the team card packs so I can continue with my Tigers collection. Of course the Hi #sandSPs wouldn't be in there so I would have incomplete Tiger sets. Now how disappointing is my Grandson Daniel going to be when I kick and heinheritsa bunch of incomplete Tigers sets. Is this the year my 52 to present Topps Tiger run willofficially end? Whoda that the UV endwould be markthedemise of the run. I always thought the 52 Billy Hoeft would be the show stopper, but no, it will more likely be a2012 Jacob Turner. I better bring this Rambling to an end before Iget re-resentment. I'll try to employ my "Life is a trade off" philosophy here and end withon apositive note. Henceforth I will only need to purchase the SCD of Vintage Cards, saving significant space on my bookcase. Life is indeed a trade off,but often not a fair one. I think I need a FOOT meeting so as to commiserate with brethren. G-d is goodto provide me with a card show to attend, I'm looking forward toseeing some OBCers in Redford tomorrow. "we keep what we give away!" From: Joshua Levine To: seanobc@comcast.net; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, February 4, 2012 9:44:07 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] "end of an era" Just as well...Topps customer service and promotions are awful and a joke. They lost their BBB rating (it now stands at an F) and they have an open file with the New York State Attorney General over the 2011 Diamond promotion becauseof bait and switch tactics and shipping costs, they also changed the rules in the middle of the promotion. I refuse to buy anything new from them going forward. This was a choice made earlier this year when they told me and my 4th grade class that they are in a "business to make money not make kids happy"...seriously....WE know you are a business but you could have had some free PR and some new customers if you had bothered to listen to me and the students. Just shameful. -----Original Message----- From: Supreme Commander To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Fri, Feb 3, 2012 7:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] "end of an era" Sorry this is not vintage related, but it will stand as my "twice a year UV interuption". The guy I buy my new topps cases from moved to Fla, and Topps didn't like his new address (not retail enough) so they pulled his account, after 30 years! I've been buying from this guy for nearly half that time! Point is, It doesn't look like I will be getting so, if anyone does decide to buy a box, given the likely silly inflated prices over the squirrel, just as it happend over Bush/Mantle in '07 (was that 5 years ago!), you will not be able to buy from me :( (that was brutal sentence!) So, continue collecting the vintage stuff, and good luck if you are still going to try to open packs this year and going forward... heavy sigh :( Go OBC! ================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:50:16 +0000 (UTC) To: obcbobd , smartalecx , From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Mark Atnip ???
Not sure what this reply means...

Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 20:17:30 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Richard" Subject: question about 1977 hostess I have some cards with brown printing on the back and others with black printing - is there a difference? Richard Labs ================= To: Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 15:50:55 -0500 From: Mac Wubben Subject: Thanks to TJ TJ Valacak hits the 75 topps list with a fine 12 pack...Perry, Mays mvp, killer MVP to name a few. Thanks TJ! ================= Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 19:23:28 -0800 (PST) To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" From: Richard Labs Subject: would you get these graded Scan 120350011.pdf ================= Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 03:28:56 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Richard" Subject: oh well i will have to figure out how to scan and send ================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 06:44:12 -0800 (PST) To: OBC Ramblings From: Geno Wagner Subject: Super Bowl pool link Yikes - I accidentally deleted it! Can somebody shoot me the grid? ================= To: srittenberg@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:01:16 -0500 (EST) From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Linda Fitak I mailed Linda a package in November, and never heard back from her. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Steve Rittenberg To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Thu, Feb 2, 2012 11:42 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Linda Fitak Has anyone heard from Linda Fitak recently? She's the last person I need to track down for the Membership poll. I see the last Thanks she posted was from August. I don't have a response to the email I sent her and I cannot find her on Facebook. I googled her name and I think I found her but I need to check and email/confirm. ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:58:24 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: OBC superbowl website hacked! :) http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm get those wantlists updated! Go OBC! ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 19:10:03 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: first winner! Mike Rich is our first quarter winner! Mike... duck! :) ps: having a little tech. diff with comcast, so the silly page isn't updated yet :( ================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 16:20:58 -0800 (PST) To: srittenberg@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, From: John Stamper Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Linda Fitak I see her husband Tim from time to time at the local BBC store. I know he goes into the store every week, he sells and buys items on their "Bid Board." I'll get a message to him and have Linda contact Steve. John Stamperhttp://holidayandhobbies.yolasite.com/ --- On Sun, 2/5/12, mikesportsfan@aol.com wrote: From: mikesportsfan@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Linda Fitak To: srittenberg@gmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, February 5, 2012, 2:01 PM I mailedLinda a package in November, and never heard back from her. Mike Rich -----Original Message----- From: Steve Rittenberg To: OBC-Ramblings Sent: Thu, Feb 2, 2012 11:42 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Linda Fitak Has anyone heard from Linda Fitak recently? She's the last person I need to track down for the Membership poll. I see the last Thanks she posted was from August. I don't have a response to the email I sent her and I cannot find her on Facebook. I googled her name and I think I found her but I need to check and email/confirm. ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 19:54:09 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: no second winner yet! What suspense! Because Mike's numbers came up again, the NEXT score will decide the next winner. Note... the PAT doesn't count as a score change... so a TD will go to the 7, unless of course, they miss the PAT. ================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:52:02 -0800 To: Supreme Commander From: Joshua Levine Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] OBC superbowl website hacked! :) I am not complaining! On Feb 5, 2012, at 2:58 PM, "Supreme Commander" wrote: > http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm > get those wantlists updated! > Go OBC! ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 20:31:34 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: winner #2! Rich Labs joins Mike Rich :) we have one confirmed hit so far, but I still can't get through to comcast :( ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 21:01:21 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: Congrats to Matt Yudt! Mike Rich Rich Labs Matt Yudt One more winner. guys with short names seem to be up :) Go OBC! ================= Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 21:02:44 -0500 (EST) To: seanobc@comcast.net, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: LUURSCJG@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Congrats to Matt Yudt! Content-Language: en Ray Luurs that 8 letters :-) In a message dated 2/5/2012 8:01:26 P.M. Central Standard Time, seanobc@comcast.net writes: Mike Rich Rich Labs Matt Yudt One more winner. guys with short names seem to be up :) Go OBC! ================= To: Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 22:01:55 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: Randy Welk is the 4th winner! Mike Rich Rich Labs Matt Yudt Randy Welk go get 'em guys! Congrats Giants fans. Go OBC! ================= Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:47:46 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "B-999" Subject: Re: Randy Welk is the 4th winner! I cheered when Bradshaw fell in the end zone--- then cried when I saw the call for a two point conversion.... just sour cards I guess :) Brian Betza --- In OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, "Supreme Commander" wrote: > Mike Rich > Rich Labs > Matt Yudt > Randy Welk > go get 'em guys! > Congrats Giants fans. > Go OBC! > Sean ================= To: "'B-999'" , Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:14:46 -0500 From: "Matt Yudt" Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Randy Welk is the 4th winner! Just one too many letters in your last name I guess : ) From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of B-999 Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 10:48 PM To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Randy Welk is the 4th winner! I cheered when Bradshaw fell in the end zone--- then cried when I saw the call for a two point conversion.... just sour cards I guess :) Brian Betza --- In OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com , "Supreme Commander" > Mike Rich > Rich Labs > Matt Yudt > Randy Welk > go get 'em guys! > Congrats Giants fans. > Go OBC! > Sean ================= To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 11:27:01 -0800 From: "wite3@aol.com" Subject: Test Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless ================= To: , Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:47:46 -0500 From: "Rob Fitts" Subject: 1953 Topps lot- want to split? Hi guys I'm thinking of buying a lot of 1953 cards, but I have 24 of the 1953 Toppsbaseball. The condition will vary from F-VG. the numbers are 2 26 49 75 88 124 127 136 156 179 182 185 186 190 193 195 196 198 (poor) 204 208 209 214 216 (poor) 217. Plus 2 1955 Bowmans- unknown numbers. The price would be $100 for the lot of 26 cards If you are interested please let me know ASAP rob fitts Murder, Espionage & Baseball ================= To: Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 20:22:57 -0500 From: "Rob Fitts" Subject: Rob Fitts on Sports By Line with Ron Barr tonight Don't know if any of you guys listen to Sports By Line but if they don't cut me I'll be interviewed by Ron Barr tonight Murder, Espionage & Baseball ================= To: Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 19:43:21 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: Superbowl pool site updated! Comcast still sucks, but I was able to update this... keep those numbers coming! Go OBC! http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm ================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:03:27 -0800 (PST) To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Geno Wagner Subject: membership poll quandry Fellas -- After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down on the poll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. They can always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that reapplied about a month after every poll because he never replied...no problem, he was right back in. The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of sending cards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say "thanks." Those cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the group, but you have no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become a shot in the dark...you might as well just waiver the cards. Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if people are inactive...just tell me! Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 21:10:26 -0500 (EST) To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry Content-Language: en i wait for 3 weeks after i send a card out, and then i will write to the person i sent it to and find out if they got it. in almost all cases, life just got in the way, and they didn't post thanks yet. over the past week, i have seen a few folks post thanks that covered several weeks, or even months. sometimes, folks just fall behind. having said that, i have no problem dropping people who cant take the time to respond to a poll with a simple yes to george. Gary Mandell 3930 North Pine Grove Avenue # 3108 Chicago, IL 60613-5518 _http://gmcards.homestead.com/mywebpage.html_ (http://gmcards.homestead.com/) Member: OCT, OBC, DT, TB In a message dated 2/8/2012 8:03:34 P.M. Central Standard Time, illini_grad_90@yahoo.com writes: Fellas -- After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down on the poll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. They can always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that reapplied about a month after every poll because he never replied...no problem, he was right back in. The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of sending cards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say "thanks." Those cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the group, but you have no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become a shot in the dark...you might as well just waiver the cards. Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if people are inactive...just tell me! Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 19:20:20 -0800 (PST) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, Supreme Commander From: John Stamper Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Superbowl pool site updated! How did anyone find more hits to Mike Rich than to Randy or Matt? John Stamper --- On Wed, 2/8/12, Supreme Commander wrote: From: Supreme Commander Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Superbowl pool site updated! To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 4:43 PM Comcast still sucks, but I was able to update keep those numbers coming! Go OBC! http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm ================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:43:45 -0500 To: Geno Wagner From: Bob Donaldson Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry I agree with Geno. Last November I sent out 60+ envelopes in one week, but received less than 50 thanks. I'm sure a number of the people who didn't thank me (or anyone else) are the among the people we are chasing down in the membership poll. On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Geno Wagner wrote: > ** > Fellas -- > After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no > acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down > on the poll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. > They can always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that > reapplied about a month after every poll because he never replied...no > problem, he was right back in. > The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of > sending cards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say > "thanks." Those cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the > group, but you have no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become > a shot in the dark...you might as well just waiver the cards. > Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if > people are inactive...just tell me! > Take Care, > Geno ================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:04:08 -0800 (PST) To: Bob Donaldson , Geno Wagner From: EEK Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry Ditto to Bob and Geno, thanks for putting it out there. I believe that RAOKs deserve a response without the RAOKer having to solicit the ROAKee. EEK"we keep what we give away!" From: Bob Donaldson To: Geno Wagner Cc: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, February 9, 2012 8:43:45 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry I agree with Geno. Last November I sent out 60+ envelopes in one week, butreceivedless than 50 thanks. I'm sure a number of the people who didn't thank me (or anyone else) are the among the people we are chasing down in the membership poll. On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Geno Wagner wrote: >Fellas -- >After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no >acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down on >poll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. They can >always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that reapplied about >month after every poll because he never replied...no problem, he was rightback >The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of sending >cards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say "thanks." Those >cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the group, but youhave >no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become a shot in the dark...you >might as well just waiver the cards. >Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if people >are inactive...just tell me! >Take Care, ================= To: Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 12:02:24 -0500 From: richard dingman Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry I hope I have never forgotten to thank someone for sending me cards. If someone doesn't respond to me I just assume they are no longer interested and make a note in my records to not send any more in the future. Richard D To: obcbobd@gmail.com; illini_grad_90@yahoo.com CC: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: originaleek1@att.net Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:04:08 -0800 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry Ditto to Bob and Geno, thanks for putting it out there. I believe that RAOKs deserve a response without the RAOKer having to solicit the ROAKee. EEK "we keep what we give away!" From: Bob Donaldson To: Geno Wagner Cc: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, February 9, 2012 8:43:45 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry I agree with Geno. Last November I sent out 60+ envelopes in one week, butreceived less than 50 thanks. I'm sure a number of the people who didn't thank me (or anyone else) are the among the people we are chasing down in the membership poll. On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Geno Wagner wrote: Fellas -- After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down on thepoll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. They can always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that reapplied about a month after every poll because he never replied...no problem, he was right back in. The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of sendingcards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say "thanks." Those cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the group, butyou have no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become a shot inthe dark...you might as well just waiver the cards. Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if people are inactive...just tell me! Take Care, ================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 11:05:31 -0600 To: Bob Donaldson From: Doug Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] membership poll quandry I have found myself being inactive much more than I would like, and certainly can relate to having other life priorities pushing the card collection to the back burner. However, anytime I have gotten cards from someone, and it amazing how generous this group is even when you aren't very active, I have made it a point to send out a thank you within a day or two. Sending out a thank you takes a fraction of the time required to look through a wantlist, pull cards, etc, and really is important to do. I agree with checking with the person in a few weeks to verify that the cards arrived....I hope no one ever hesitates to check with me if they don't see a timely thank you. Just my humble opinion....Doug Sent from my iPad On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:43 AM, Bob Donaldson wrote: > I agree with Geno. Last November I sent out 60+ envelopes in one week, but received less than 50 thanks. I'm sure a number of the people who didn't thank me (or anyone else) are the among the people we are chasing down inthe membership poll. > thanks > Bob > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Geno Wagner wrote: > Fellas -- > After sending out cards to a few folks in recent weeks and getting no acknowledgement, it makes me wonder why we spend time chasing people down on the poll. To me, if they don't answer, then drop them off...case closed. They can always reapply. When I was on the AC, there was one guy that reapplied about a month after every poll because he never replied...no problem, he was right back in. > The problem I see with chasing people down is we run into issues of sending cards to people who are seemingly not interested enough to say "thanks."Those cards could have gone to somebody else who is active in the group, but you have no way of knowing who those people are. So RAOKs become a shot in the dark...you might as well just waiver the cards. > Am I overstating the issue? If so, sorry to bring it up. I don't care if people are inactive...just tell me! > Take Care, > Geno ================= To: Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 12:57:41 -0600 From: "George and Susan Vrechek" Subject: Re: membership poll quandry Geno's point that "thanks" should be sent is a good reminder. I've had similar experiences, although sometimes the thanks get lost in the email pile. I always cc the person directly as well so they know I got what they sent. It is important to get thank yous out - our parents aren't around to nag us. The membership poll response was actually not too bad. About half the members respond almost immediately. Two elected to go inactive. Within a week I hear from about 80% of the members. Some members are not as active on emails, have internet problems, are out of town, or overwhelmed. We had to trackdown the last 10 people and all but one have expressed their desire to continue. As always, we could use some more active members and I don't want todiscourage anyone who is a member from continuing in some capacity. George Vrechek ================= Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 19:05:12 -0800 (PST) To: OBC Ramblings From: Lynn Miller Subject: Yahoo Fantasy Baseball Yahoo says it's time, let's go! Mark Z are you setting up the OBC leagueagain? ================= To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:48:18 -0500 (EST) From: ehpiii@aol.com Subject: how to confirm a Koufax rookie is legit I wonder how to best confirm that a Koufax rookie is legit? In this case I would be surprised that a fake would be printed off-center or that an apparently knowledgeable seller woudl be listing, but still I wonder and don't know when & where I might eventually pick one up. any tips? THanks http://www.ebay.com/itm/1955-Topps-Set-Break-SANDY-KOUFAX-Rookie-Card-RC-123-VG-Dodgers-HOF-/150754525995?ptUS_Baseball&hashitem2319ab832b ================= To: "obc" Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 09:03:46 -0600 From: "ken goetsch" Subject: : Find me.............in the picture................... Ran across this on eBay last week....and just had to get "it"..................... Click on the "enlarge " link.......and "search for me.......These were my season seats from 1975-2002..I am right underneath Breuers' elbow........taken in 1987...... ........the guy next to me is my brother Wayne........and the guy in front of him is Greg .who now lives in Hartland, Wis...we[Greg] are still friends after all these years......thought you would enjoy. Saw a lot of great games with all the "greats of the game"................... http://www.ebay.com/itm/250977030387?ssPageNameSTRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksidp3984.m1497.l2649 Ken Goetsch ================= To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:16:20 -0500 (EST) From: ricktopps@aol.com Subject: Re: how to confirm a Koufax rookie is legit I think it is very difficult to confirm the legitimacy of a card on-line. Although a few reprints have wide borders, the best reprints look good online. I think the proof comes when you feel the card and look at the card using a 10x or 20x magnifying glass or loupe. When a guy has earned perfect feedback with >1500 positive feedback then I believe he is trying to be honest. I also don't believe someone would knowingly through a Koufax reprint in with 80+ other auctions for 1955 cards. I believe the bigger danger is having a legitimate seller selling a card that he bought 20 years ago which he didn't realize was a reprint at the timewhen he bought it. How many people have bought 1952 Mantle's #311 and actually have a very rough old looking reprints. Sometimes I wonder how many reprints are in my collection. Very few I would hope, but who knows? I believe this card is real, but the biggest danger is that the seller unknowingly bought a very good reprint and now is selling it with a clear conscience. Rick Johnson ================= To: Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:42:25 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: OBC Superbowl Pool - race for second place! Take a look at the current numbers... excellent stuff, but, if you havent sent your cards yet, we have quite a "race" here for the 2nd best tally. Go OBC! http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm ================= Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:29:21 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC-Ramblings , ehpiii From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] how to confirm a Koufax rookie is legit Ed...this card looks fine to me. i should say "scan" looks fine. Holding the card would be best bet in my opinion as the 55 topps card stock is quite recognizable.
Seller has a return policy where you only pay shipping back if you don't like it.

OBC Forever
Brian


Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:33:58 +0000 (UTC) To: obc , ken From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] : Find me.............in the Ken, that's uber-cool!

OBC Forever
Brian

Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= To: Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:22:54 -0500 From: "Rob Fitts" Subject: Type Card Labels A month or so, Mac came up with a great idea on how to display a type card collection- put the cards in labeled Card Saver 1 holders and put the holders in 4 pocket sheets. Today, I started to reorganize my collection in that style. To begin with I needed to create the labels. So I now have a Word file that contains nearly 2000 type card labels laid out for Avery 5267 labels. If anybody wants a copy of this file, just email me. rob fitts Murder, Espionage & Baseball ================= To: Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:22:09 -0500 From: "Matt Yudt" Subject: web site for new guys... Hi all Does anyone use the 'ebay about me' page as there want list website? There's a local guy who's also a member of VCT or one of the others and has one of those set up, and is thinking of applying. I told him Google sites is very easy, but I would ask about. I know there is the OBC want list manager that many use too. Recommendations?? ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings" Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 13:23:36 -0500 From: "Mark Holland" Subject: Off condition collectors I posted an email this morning in VCT asking for a way to identify and group together =E2=9C Any Condition Collectors=E2=9D. You know how it isto search thru lists that want Nr-Mt cards from the 60s. Most of us in OBC are really flexible on condition but not as much in the other groups. Based on the feedback from VCT (10 responses in 3 hours) I decided to add a page to my web site aptly called =E2=9CAny Condition Collectors=E2=9D. Here is the link: http://vintagebaseballcardwantlist.weebly.com/any-condition-collectors.html If you would like to be added to the page just send me an email. If you responded in VCT then you are already there. My goal is to make it easy and fun to trade with people that appreciate the creases that come with age. Looking for any ideas, comments and suggestions. Mark Holland Vintage List: ================= To: "OBC-Ramblings" , Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:33:24 -0500 From: "Mark Holland" Subject: "Any Condition Collectors" - Vintage Baseball Card Wantlist We have 23 people signed up on the list so far. It is a compilation of VCTand OBC members. Looking for input on how and where this list should be maintained permanently. I don=E2=99t mind where it is but would be receptive to suggestions on how to make it more visible and accessible. Any Condition Collectors Thanks for everyone=E2=99s interest. I was able to pull cards for 4 people on the list today and will work on more as time permits. Enjoy the subset of our group(s). Mark Holland Vintage List: ================= To: "'OBC Ramblings'" Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:47:35 -0500 From: "Bob Donaldson" Subject: Fantasy BB League The Fantasy BB League I am in has an opening for one player, to take over the team of an owner who has quit. The is a three man keeper team with a draft just before opening day. The cost is $150. Please LMK if you are interested and I can send out details. ================= Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:59:02 -0600 (GMT-06:00) To: "obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com" From: Mark Z Subject: sportlots commission >I buy on sportlots pretty frequently >not sure if you guys knew or not, but they give a credit when someone uses you as a referral when they buy from sportlots. >I have a link on the bottom of my webpages in case anyone wants to hit me with some credit benefit if you buy on that site. >Likewise, I would be willing to use your link if you set one up or send to me. >You can't get any credit referring yourself (already tried that lol) >thanks, markz >http://home.earthlink.net/~mzentko/ ================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:46:34 -0600 To: Mark Zentkovich , John Harrell , From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: Hockey night (and OBC day) in Huntsville While helping George V with the membership poll, I learned that Mark Atnip is now the announcer for the Nashville Ice Bears hockey team. Mark told me that the Nashville team is travelling here on Feb 25 to play the Huntsville team. Mark will be coming earlier and offered to get together that afternoon to swap cards. Would anyone like to join us on Saturday afternoon (for cards) or Saturday night (for the game)? I have a couple of extra rooms here if people want to stay over. I think Mark Z and Bama are the closest OBCers but who knows -- maybe several of you will make a road trip for this first ever OBC meeting in Huntsville. I'm also inviting a non-obcer who I'm trying to pull into the group. Get back to me when convenient. ================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:53:00 -0600 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: Fwd: Hockey night (and OBC day) in Huntsville I wrote Nashville instead of Knoxville. Tomayto or tomahto. Haha Here's a picture of Mark http://knoxvilleicebears.com/team/staff/mark_atnip ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Steve Rittenberg Date: Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 9:46 AM Subject: Hockey night (and OBC day) in Huntsville To: Mark Zentkovich , John Harrell , OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Cc: matnip@nashvilleicebears.com While helping George V with the membership poll, I learned that Mark Atnip is now the announcer for the Nashville Ice Bears hockey team. Mark told me that the Nashville team is travelling here on Feb 25 to play the Huntsville team. Mark will be coming earlier and offered to get together that afternoon to swap cards. Would anyone like to join us on Saturday afternoon (for cards) or Saturday night (for the game)? I have a couple of extra rooms here if people want to stay over. I think Mark Z and Bama are the closest OBCers but who knows -- maybe several of you will make a road trip for this first ever OBC meeting in Huntsville. I'm also inviting a non-obcer who I'm trying to pull into the group. Get back to me when convenient. ================= Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:57:01 -0600 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Steve Rittenberg Subject: OBC coin collectors? Who are the coin collectors in OBC? As a break from cards, I'm putting together albums of pennies, dimes, nickels and quarters. Nothing fancy for me - mostly stuff from the 50s to today is satisfactory. I have lots of extras available. If a child of an OBCer really wanted state commemorative quarters, I could probably send out a complete set. Of course, I need coins but I am so poor at mailing that I am no longer going to publicize my wants. Well, that attitude won't last 10 minutes but its a starting point. Let me know if there is interest before I take all my "dupes" to the bank and trade them in for others that I can search through. ================= Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:05:02 -0800 (PST) To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" From: Rick Lyons Subject: 74 topps stamp panels Is anyone currently working on the full sheets for this set? ================= Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:37:15 -0500 To: obc ramblings From: Matthew Glidden Subject: 2011 National note from Ryan Distelrath Hi all, Reviewed my YouTube postings tonight and found a note from Ryan D on our 2011 National OBC highlights. http://www.youtube.com/watch?vauu-_bog5rY "Incredible. It's nice to put faces to names. Perhaps one of these years I'll make the road trip. There's just a few obstacles... sitting in one spot for prolonged periods of time can cause pressure ulcers... but=EF=BB=BF perhaps I can hop a plane. But then there's transportation issues to transport my heavy electric chair around. Maybe I'll figure SOMETHIING Sorry to know that Ryan couldn't make it to a show, but will remember him when we get together again this summer. ================= To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:30:52 -0500 (EST) From: FIREMAN Subject: Remembering "THE KID" Hey all, Very sad news today as one of my favorite baseball players passed away today. Gary Carter was one of my all time favorite Meat and baseball players ever. I remember as a young kid myself wearing #8 for 3 years in little league because when i was 9 10 and 11 i dreamed of being Gary. I was so fortunate to have him on the mets as i got to see him play many games, and I remember one game when the mets were playing the Phillies and Lance Parrish hit2 home runs, then Gary Carter came up and tied the score with a home run of his own. It was so special seeing "The Kid" hit a home run, again I saw him hit quite a few, but that one sticks out the most. As I got older I grew to appreciate him more with his accomplishments on and off the field, and realized what a leader he was. I took that attitude and and drilled it into my son Tony as he plays baseball now, Now my son plays just like "The Kid" and his teammates call Tony" the kid" although it was because he was the youngest on his team for 2 years...but he plays 150% every game, and he is a catcher. I think this year in Honor of Gary Carter my son Tony will wear #8. I was fortunate to meet gary Garter 2 times before he was diagnosed with the brain tumors, and both times he was a gentleman and we just talked aboutbaseball and the 86 Mets. My favorite time meeting him was in Cooperstown,even though he was in the hall as an Expo he always wore Mets jerseys and hats up there as he felt like he was a Mets ( i guess because he won in NY)i dont know, but he loved his days in New York more then anything. I cant believe how this is actually affecting me, as i really am sad about this news. Usually i dont know what to feel when a celebrity passes, but this is one of the first that i felt some connection to. Well In closing .....Heres to you "KID" go play in that "Field of Dreams" Rob Gioia ================= Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:07:39 -0500 To: FIREMAN From: "Jimmy \"Catfish\" Parker" Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Remembering "THE KID" Well put Rob. By all accounts a class act and a great "gamer". He'll be sorely missed and our sport has lost another great one. Jimmy "Catfish" Parker ...Save the gum for me! On Feb 16, 2012, at 6:30 PM, FIREMAN wrote: > Hey all, > Very sad news today as one of my favorite baseball players passed away today. Gary Carter was one of my all time favorite Meat and baseball playersever. I remember as a young kid myself wearing #8 for 3 years in little league because when i was 9 10 and 11 i dreamed of being Gary. I was so fortunate to have him on the mets as i got to see him play many games, and I remember one game when the mets were playing the Phillies and Lance Parrish hit 2 home runs, then Gary Carter came up and tied the score with a home runof his own. It was so special seeing "The Kid" hit a home run, again I sawhim hit quite a few, but that one sticks out the most. > As I got older I grew to appreciate him more with his accomplishments on and off the field, and realized what a leader he was. I took that attitude and and drilled it into my son Tony as he plays baseball now, Now my son plays just like "The Kid" and his teammates call Tony" the kid" although itwas because he was the youngest on his team for 2 years...but he plays 150% every game, and he is a catcher. I think this year in Honor of Gary Carter my son Tony will wear #8. > I was fortunate to meet gary Garter 2 times before he was diagnosed withthe brain tumors, and both times he was a gentleman and we just talked about baseball and the 86 Mets. My favorite time meeting him was in Cooperstown, even though he was in the hall as an Expo he always wore Mets jerseys and hats up there as he felt like he was a Mets ( i guess because he won in NY) i dont know, but he loved his days in New York more then anything. > I cant believe how this is actually affecting me, as i really am sad about this news. Usually i dont know what to feel when a celebrity passes, but this is one of the first that i felt some connection to. > Well In closing .....Heres to you "KID" go play in that "Field of Dreams" > Rob Gioia ================= To: Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:44:09 -0600 From: Subject: Joe Denning Hello All: Just got an email from Joe Denning in Afghanistan. He says he is safe and doing well but working long hours. Thought everyone would appreciate this update. Take Care, Randy Griffin ================= Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 02:18:51 +0000 (UTC) To: obc-ramblings , From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Joe Denning good news...thanks for sharing!!
OBC Forever
Brian

Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 02:51:49 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Bob" Subject: Remembering Gary Carter -- player and collector Hi gang, Here is my blog on Gary Carter, recalling a 1981 interview I did with him about his baseball card collection. http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/sports/related/C938/ ================= To: Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:11:02 -0500 From: "Supreme Commander" Subject: Super Super Bowl Pool check out the latest update... http://home.comcast.net/~seankatie/pool-12.htm Randy has pulled into the lead, and we are at about 350 hits for the year. Nice work you guys! If anyone hasn't emailed me their numbers, please so. Congrats again to our "Winners" and all participants. Go OBC! ================= To: Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:50:36 +0000 From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Re: monday obc get together? Hello all I will not be able to joon. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2012, at 10:38 AM, "hoot_owl1@verizon.net" > wrote: On 02/17/12, Steve Rittenberg> I am flying in to BWI. Arrive around 10am. I think I am free the rest of the day (including dinner and evening). Could someone please forward this to Dan Austin , Richard Robinson, (and Ramblings?). I don't have the email addresses handy on my iPhone. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 15, 2012, at 7:02 PM, hoot_owl1@verizon.net Monday is a work day for me--unfortunately not a holiday. It would be pretty much impossible for me to make a mid-day get together (bummer). peter mead On 02/15/12, Mac Wubben<obcmac@hotmail.com> Adding all the DC area folks to this email...let the planning commence. What's the Rittenberg plan? To: anthony.arbeeny@hyatt.com; obcmac@hotmail.com Subject: monday obc get together? From: typecard@aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:06:26 -0500 Next Monday Steve Rittenberg will be at a hotel near Ft Belvoir in SE Fairfax County. That's the President's Day holiday. Are you available to get together during the day? Also, please forward to Peter Mead - I don't have hisemail The information contained in this communication is confidential and intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend it to the sender and delete the original message and copy of it from your computer system. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to our official business should be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the company. ================= Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:35:19 -0800 (PST) To: OBC Ramblings From: Glenn Codere Subject: OBC meet in Vegas Maureen and I have just returned from Las Vegas, where we spent a terrific week watching Scotland getting thumped in the World Rugby Sevens tournament, generally eating and drinking too much, shopping, and throwing our hard earned money down the throats of slots machines (damn you, Wizard Of Oz!!). Somewhere along the way, we managed to spend an incredibly enjoyable hour in the company of local OBCers Rich Niessen and Lynn Miller. Rich, Lynn and their wives joined Maureen and I (and our friends Claire, Dan, and Mark ANDour nephew Mikah and his wife Shannon) for the breakfast buffet at Bally's(Note to OBCers visiting Vegas - avoid the breakfast buffet at Bally's). As it always seems to be, Lynn, Rich and I were soon gabbing away like we'd known each other for decades, swapping cards, stories, and opinions onthis that and the other. Unfortunately, Lynn's cell phone put a damper on things when a call came through summoning him to work, so breakfast had to progress without him. Lynn definitely missed out on the rare treat of me actually paying for breakfast!! Next time, perhaps. Rich...Lynn.....what an amazing pleasure it was to finally meet up with youguys. It was everything I expected and more. I definitely hope that we'll get more opportunities to do it again in future. Glenn's MusicCollection at Rate Your Music Glenn's Sports Collection WantList ================= To: "obc" Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 06:48:38 -0600 From: "ken goetsch" Subject: Sunday Thanks T.J. Valcak- sends a surprise package with a 3 hit attack to the seldom hit65' Topps embossed insert set......very much appreciated, T.J..Thanks a bunch. Richard Labs- sends a wonderful package filled with 10 solid bingos to the 59' Topps baseball set......Thanks for thinking of me, Richard. Ken Goetsch ================= To: Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:02:06 -0500 From: "Matt Yudt" Subject: 57 Mantle? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem I made an offer of $20 (which I thought was generous??) . It was refused Last weekend I picked up a 57 Mays in poor condition for $10.. I was hoping to make it a good month for 57 stars. albeit in poor condition. What would you pay? ================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 15:16:03 -0500 To: obc ramblings From: Matthew Glidden Subject: Longest "gap" between photo use (and reuse) by Topps? Hi guys, One of the blogosphere's many custom card makers did a nice 1969 Pilots version of Lou Piniella today. In writing Lou's card history, it occurred to me that his 1970 Topps Super photo was probably taken in 1963 (as a Senators prospect). Type Site: Cards That Never Were #5, 1969 Topps Lou Piniella If I'm correct, that's 6-7 years between Lou's photo being taken and then appearing as "current" on a Topps card. Does anyone know of a wider gap? I know they fudged two or three years routinely, but a half-dozen seems like the limit of believability... ================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:11:08 -0500 (EST) To: glidden.matthew@gmail.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Longest "gap" between photo use (and reuse) by Topps? Content-Language: en i think the same foto was used for camelo pascaul (?) for 28 consecutive Gary Mandell 3930 North Pine Grove Avenue # 3108 Chicago, IL 60613-5518 _http://gmcards.homestead.com/mywebpage.html_ (http://gmcards.homestead.com/) Member: OCT, OBC, DT, TB In a message dated 2/20/2012 2:16:08 P.M. Central Standard Time, glidden.matthew@gmail.com writes: Hi guys, One of the blogosphere's many custom card makers did a nice 1969 Pilots version of Lou Piniella today. In writing Lou's card history, it occurred to me that his 1970 Topps Super photo was probably taken in 1963 (as a Senators _Type Site: Cards That Never Were #5, 1969 Topps Lou Piniella_ (http://number5typecollection.blogspot.com/2012/02/type-site-cards-that-never-were-5-196 If I'm correct, that's 6-7 years between Lou's photo being taken and then appearing as "current" on a Topps card. Does anyone know of a wider gap? I know they fudged two or three years routinely, but a half-dozen seems like the limit of believability... ================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:12:26 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Tom Housley" Subject: Re: 57 Mantle? I love how the description of the card was "like new". Seller should get dinged for that one! ================= Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:41:39 -0500 To: vct@lists.vintagecardtraders.com,obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Dan Austin Subject: Fleer World Series Cards Article Some useful info on the Fleer World series cards "update" in the late 1970's: http://fleersticker.blogspot.com/2010/03/fleer-world-series-update-cards-mystery.html Dan Austin - dan@iamdanaustin.com Visit me at http://iamdanaustin.com "How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world." - William Shakespeare ================= To: Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:28:03 -0600 From: "George and Susan Vrechek" Subject: Re: Fleer World Series Cards Article Thanks much, Dan, for sharing the info on the Fleer update cards. It is great to get this type of info even though it is two years late circulating through the hobby. It all makes sense. I had those babies on my wantlist for a long time. I think I'll view them properly as another set or update that is probably like finding a needle in a haystack. George Vrechek ================= Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:43:23 -0500 (EST) To: vrechek@ameritech.net, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: alvinautry@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Re: Fleer World Series Cards Article Content-Language: en Thanks very much! It was my desire to complete the Fleer WS sets that got me back into the hobby several years back. As they were one of my favorite sets as a kid. I took it a few steps further and have completed all the Laughlin sets with the exception of the Stand Ups. Now it looks like I have some more collecting to do for that WS set after all. I had never realized there were any updates other than the sticker cards. I did go back and check the current SCD and see those update cards are priced much higher than the rest. Yes, indeed sounds like a needle in a haystack! I better start looking! In a message dated 2/21/2012 8:28:05 A.M. Central Standard Time, vrechek@ameritech.net writes: Thanks much, Dan, for sharing the info on the Fleer update cards. It is great to get this type of info even though it is two years late circulating through the hobby. It all makes sense. I had those babies on my wantlist for a long time. I think I=E2=99ll view them properly as another set or update is probably like finding a needle in a haystack. George Vrechek ================= Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 14:18:49 -0800 (PST) To: OBC Ramblings From: Glenn Codere Subject: Speaking of green tints..... Can anyone tell me precisely what I'm looking for to tell the difference between the "normal" and the "greenie" checklist? I'm not terribly good at "Spot the difference", so the two on the OBC library page look pretty similarto Glenn's MusicCollection at Rate Your Music Glenn's Sports Collection WantList ================= To: "'obc ramblings'" Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:36:33 -0500 From: "Bob Donaldson" Subject: Wilmington MA Shriner's Show This Spring Anyone going to the Spring Shirner's Show this year? March 30th -April1st http://www.hollywoodcollectibles.com/content/upcoming-signing-and-events-137 And speaking of events in Mass, anyone go to the Hall's Nostalgia Auctions in Arlington http://www.hallsnostalgia.com/, about a mile from my house, I might try and hit on. ================= Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 01:41:35 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC , Glenn From: Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Glenn, its right before your eyes dude.
The easiest way is to look at card 192 on the checklist...these are two vastly different cards as any lunatic will tell you...See? You need both versions...Grant this is very likely all your fault.

OBC Forever
Brian

Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= To: , Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:18 -0800 From: "Grant Rainsley" Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Ya mean like this? The comma????? Attached....... From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of familytoad@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:42 PM To: OBC; Glenn Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Glenn, its right before your eyes dude. The easiest way is to look at card 192 on the checklist...these are two vastly different cards as any lunatic will tell you...See? You need both versions...Grant this is very likely all your fault. OBC Forever Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ----- Original Message ----- From: glenncodere@yahoo.com To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent:Tue Feb 21 10:18:56 UTC 2012 Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Can anyone tell me precisely what I'm looking for to tell the difference between the "normal" and the "greenie" checklist? I'm not terribly good at "Spot the difference", so the two on the OBC library page look pretty similar to me. Glenn's Music Collection at Rate Your Music Glenn's Sports Collection WantList No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.455 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4212 - Release Date: 02/20/12 ================= Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:52:38 -0800 (PST) To: Grant Rainsley From: EEK Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... [1 Attachment] Oh, I see, they are different.The little white check boxes are lower on card on the right. Is that a print error or a variation? If it's a variationdo I get credit for discovering it? "we keep what we give away!" From: Grant Rainsley To: familytoad@comcast.net; OBC ; Glenn Sent: Tue, February 21, 2012 9:16:18 PM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... [1 Attachment] [Attachment(s) from Grant Rainsley included below] Ya mean like this? The comma????? Attached....... From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of familytoad@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:42 PM To: OBC; Glenn Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Glenn, its right before your eyes dude. The easiest way is to look at card 192 on the checklist...these are two vastly different cards as any lunatic will tell you...See? You need both versions...Grant this is very likely all your fault. OBC Forever Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ----- Original Message ----- From: glenncodere@yahoo.com To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent:Tue Feb 21 10:18:56 UTC 2012 Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... Can anyone tell me precisely what I'm looking for to tell the difference between the "normal" and the "greenie" checklist? I'm not terribly good at "Spot the difference", so the two on the OBC library page look pretty similar to me. Glenn's MusicCollection at Rate Your Music Glenn's Sports Collection WantList No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.455 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4212 - Release Date: 02/20/12 ================= Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:25:21 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "B-999" Subject: Re: Speaking of green tints..... Wonder who owned the CL on the right... he only had the CL, Wally Moon and Mantle!! --- In OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com, "Grant Rainsley" wrote: > Ya mean like this? The comma????? Attached....... > G. > _____ > From: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com [mailto:OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of familytoad@... > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 5:42 PM > To: OBC; Glenn > Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... > Glenn, its right before your eyes dude. > The easiest way is to look at card 192 on the checklist...these are two > vastly different cards as any lunatic will tell you...See? You need both > versions...Grant this is very likely all your fault. > OBC Forever > Brian > Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD > ----- Original Message ----- > From: glenncodere@... > To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Sent:Tue Feb 21 10:18:56 UTC 2012 > Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] Speaking of green tints..... > Can anyone tell me precisely what I'm looking for to tell the difference > between the "normal" and the "greenie" checklist? I'm not terribly good at > "Spot the difference", so the two on the OBC library page look pretty > similar to me. > Glenn > Glenn's Music Collection at Rate > Your Music > Glenn's Sports Collection WantList > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.455 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4212 - Release Date: 02/20/12 > 19:34:00 ================= Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:24:44 -0500 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Subject: My Dad and baseball Subject: My Dad and baseball My Dad, William Moore passed away last week at the age of 96. He would take me to Tiger ballgames at Briggs Stadium. One of the most remembered games was opening day in 1956. Frank Lary was pitching against the A's, but it wasn't his pitching that was memorable. Frank hit a inside the park home run. Recently I looked at the box score for that game and found that Tommy Lasorda pitched in relief for the A's. George "TigersGAM" Moore ================= Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 04:58:30 +0000 (UTC) To: From: Subject: Fantasy baseball league My son and a few of his friends are talking about playing fantasy baseball...something I first did (gulp) starting 26 years ago in 1986 and up to just a few years back. (digdugdig...can you believe it!) They are all rookies to it, so I offered to help them get started. Low buyin and trade costs (15 or 20 bucks to start + 1 dollar for changing players, 1 dollar for injured reserve, is what we were thinking) Nothing too fancy for stat categories either, so as to keep these high school kids from too much complex math ;) We have 5 players i think, and could use at least 3 more if you are interested in a low stess fun way to compliment your baseball watching in 2012. I'll probably use cbs sports or yahoo to create the league, but again...it probably won't fly unless we can find a couple more guys. LMK what you think, the dudes are excited...and if I can keep them off X-box, so am I... OBC Forever Sent from Xfinity Mobile App iPAD ================= Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:39:05 +0000 (UTC) To: VCT From: talbot1@comcast.net Subject: New York City bound Hello All, My daughter Kendall and I will be in New York City through Sunday morning - we will be at PACE UNIVERSITY on Saturday as my daughterhas an audition for the musical theater program there. If anyone hasbusiness in the city and has some time to spare give me a call at (586) 306-6033 and perhaps we can get together. My kid and I have stuff to doover the next few days but we do have to eat and stuff like that so if anyone is available give me a call. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------------ MARK ================= Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:50:07 -0500 (EST) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: JEdward@aol.com Subject: Check out 1950'S FRANK THOMAS WILSON BASEBALL GLOVE - PIRATES BRAVES METS RED Any glove collectors still active in OBC? _Click here: 1950'S FRANK THOMAS WILSON BASEBALL GLOVE - PIRATES BRAVES METS REDS CUBS | eBay_ (http://www.ebay.com/itm/1950S-FRANK-THOMAS-WILSON-BASEBALL-GLOVE-PIRATES-BRAVES-METS-REDS-CUBS-/320850863382?pt=Vintage_Sports_Mem John McLaughlin ================= To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:24:38 -0500 (EST) From: Tom Housley Subject: Keeping the postman busy pt 2 I tried inserting a photo of the stack-o-mail in my last missive. Not sure if I did it right, so this time I'm attaching the pic. ================= Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 02:10:05 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Tom Housley" Subject: True Tipton Toloteros Check these babies out: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Eight-1950-51-Toleteros-Negro-League-Puerto-Rico-Baseball-Cards-damaged-/110828993583?ptUS_Baseball&hashitem19cdec3c2f Tom Housley ================= Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:32:13 -0800 (PST) To: "OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com" From: Glenn Codere Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] True Tipton Toloteros Those are brilliant. If ever a group of cards belonged in OBC, its those!! Glenn's MusicCollection at Rate Your Music Glenn's Sports Collection WantList From: Tom Housley To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 2:10 AM Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] True Tipton Toloteros Check these babies out: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Eight-1950-51-Toleteros-Negro-League-Puerto-Rico-Baseball-Cards-damaged-/110828993583?ptUS_Baseball&hashitem19cdec3c2f Tom Housley ================= To: Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:31:10 -0600 From: "George and Susan Vrechek" Subject: Last of the 1949 M&Ps I wanted to share with the gang my success in completing a set. The M&P cards seemed up my alley in that they were old, ugly, usually in lousy shape, and not too expensive. I started on the 1943 and 1949 M&P sets about 10 years ago. Five years ago I got down to one card - the 1949 DiMaggio. I finally picked it up today (minus a little cardboard) on eBay at $40 on a Buy it Now posting. The seller, of all people, has an ID of "old-baseball" which seems quite appropriate! Now wait a minute, there are variations in those sets, maybe I should...... George Vrechek ================= Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 19:18:30 -0800 (PST) To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Geno Wagner Subject: inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to that singular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 (EST) From: Gary Mandell Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= To: , Geno Wagner , Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 09:23:43 -0500 From: Mac Wubben Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 07:27:46 -0800 (PST) To: jschris@triwest.net From: Geno Wagner Subject: Re: OBC Announcements? Jason -- Everybody should be on the OBC-Announcements list. The rest are all optional. I'm on the road on my BB, so I'm going to go the easy route and CC Ramblings. Somebody (Joe?) Can come to your rescue and also anybody else who is not subscribed can chime in... Take Care, On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 8:47 AM CST ecexpress1 wrote: >Hi Geno- >You mentioned the "OBC Announcements" list in your post about inactive status. Is there a list I'm missing somewhere? I don't have access to this. >Rich Niessen mentioned in our email exchange the other day that "I may have noticed he's running for the board". I hadn't. Maybe that's because there's a list I'm not subscribed to? >Thanks very much for your help. I can't really claim Newbie status anymore, so this just qualifies as ignorance! >Jason Christopherson ================= To: obcmac@hotmail.com, OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:32:51 -0500 (EST) From: Gary Mandell Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status hi mac i raised this question a year or so ago, and i thought it was decided by the then OBCAC that inactives could run. there is at least one inactive member on the ballot this year i believe. am i mistaken? -----Original Message----- From: Mac Wubben To: smartalecx ; Geno Wagner ; obc-ramblings Sent: Mon, Feb 27, 2012 8:23 am Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:48:18 -0500 (EST) To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: cardclctor@aol.com Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status The ROC states that inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC. Inactive members are allowed to VOTE. To try to answer Geno's question, non-responders to the poll are put on the inactive list, so members who are already there don't need to be asked. However the membership poll is always sent out on the Announcements server, so inactive members can respond just to say hi or even be placed back on the active list as has happened in the past. Ken M In a message dated 2/27/2012 11:33:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, smartalecx@aol.com writes: hi mac i raised this question a year or so ago, and i thought it was decided by the then OBCAC that inactives could run. there is at least one inactive member on the ballot this year i believe. am i mistaken? -----Original Message----- From: Mac Wubben To: smartalecx ; Geno Wagner ; obc-ramblings Sent: Mon, Feb 27, 2012 8:23 am Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, they are always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can be brought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifeblood of the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part of for the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to commit the amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to that singular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:04:04 +0000 (UTC) To: OBC Ramblings From: jrhatchjr@comcast.net Subject: my status Hey gang, During the last go around of status updates I decided to go 'inactive' for a bit. Some of y'all may have noticed. Anyhow, everything is OK here in Na Hampsha...except the available time I've had lately to devote to cardboard. So I decided to go inactive until some of that time swings back in my favor. I've been a member of OBC for many, many years so I won't be going anywhere. for the foreseeable future Heck, if it wasn't for OBC I might have given up collecting a long time ago! Anyhoo...Happy Collecting! ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 03:34:40 -0000 To: OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: "Ken" Subject: Waiver Wire Got a few looking for a new home. Some of these have seen better days and some aren't bad. Please include your mailing address. Ken P 1955 Topps 26 1960 Fleer 20 1960 Topps 10 Banks, 190, 240 Aparicio, 264 Roberts, 485 Boyer 1961 Fleer 44 46 51 1961 Topps 30 Fox, 63 Kaat, 72, 455 Wynn 1965 Topps Embossed 70 1970 Fleer (Black Backs) 39 53 1975 Kelloggs 24 cracked 1975 Fleer 22 ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:21:42 +0000 (UTC) To: Mac Wubben From: talbot1@comcast.net Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I justgot this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states " Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC. " I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive roster how can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when Ihad the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior tomaking that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and felt the need to "hunt down" non responders,I reported to the AC that the majority of non responders were alreadyinactive and that I found that there were many reasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we went to great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac Wubben" To: smartalecx@aol.com, "Geno Wagner" , obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value inspending a lot of effort tryingdifferentiate inactive memberswho are just busy,occupied or overwhelmedfrom members who won't be active again.I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands onpeople whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...andthese issues can be brought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask fora certain level of commitment toALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incomingOBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= To: talbot1@comcast.net, obcmac@hotmail.com Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:27:34 -0500 (EST) From: Gary Mandell Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response. Your response begs the question of whether or not inactive members should be allowed to vote in the OBCAC elections, which I beleive they are currently. If, as you say, inactive status means OBC is a low priority at that time for the member, why do they have a say in who is running the group? -----Original Message----- From: talbot1 To: Mac Wubben Cc: Geno Wagner ; obc-ramblings Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I just got this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states "Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC." I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive roster how can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when I had the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior to making that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and feltthe need to "hunt down" non responders, I reported to the AC that the majority of non responders were already inactive and that I found that there were many reasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we went to great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK From: "Mac Wubben" To: smartalecx@aol.com, "Geno Wagner" , obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:44:13 +0000 (UTC) To: Gary Mandell From: Geordie Calvert Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Gary, being inactive doesn't necessarily mean that OBC is a low priority, or that the member doesn't care about the direction of the group. I'm sure there are many inactives that still read every rambling and thanks as it comes across the server. Take me, for instance. I was inactive for quite some time because I didn't feel right about getting cards in the mail and usually not being able to reciprocate. I rarely get to card shows or card shops (which there aren't very many of anymore), and even more rarely get access to a fresh supply of vintage dupes, so my incoming mail far outstripped whatwent out. I made the decision to go inactive, and I felt good about it. However, I still read what came across the servers and cheered silently from afar when others announced what was new in their collection. Granted, I'm sure many inactives don't read any of it, and maybe baseball cards are far from their mind. But, that wasn't true for me, and I've got tobelieve I'm not alone in that. Why shouldn't I, or anyone else like me, have had a chance to vote for the direction of this fine group and who runs it? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" To: talbot1@comcast.net, obcmac@hotmail.com Cc: "illini grad 90" , obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:27:34 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response. Your response begs the question of whether or not inactive members should be allowed to vote in the OBCAC elections, which I beleive they are currently. If, as you say, inactive status means OBC is a low priority at that time for the member, why do they have a say in who is running the group? -----Original Message----- From: talbot1 To: Mac Wubben Cc: Geno Wagner ; obc-ramblings Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I just got this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states " Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC. " I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive rosterhow can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when I had the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior to making that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and felt the need to "hunt down" non responders, I reported to the AC that the majority ofnon responders were already inactive and that I found that there were manyreasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we wentto great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac Wubben" < obcmac@hotmail.com > To: smartalecx@aol.com , "Geno Wagner" < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction betweenactive and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whosecircumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com ; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, iwouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com > To: obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:59:37 +0000 (UTC) To: Gary Mandell , From: Geordie Calvert Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status no offense taken - I know neither you or Mark intended any. I do respectfully disagree with some of your premises, though. When you say, "... you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or you aren't. Once you are active, you get those privileges back." If I'm reading that right, why bother having an inactive list at all? You'reeither active, or you shouldn't belong to the group? Really? Seriously, what rights and privileges are we talking about here? Isn't it enough that aninactive member's wantlist is no longer accessible? What other rights and privileges are inactives afforded that aren't warranted? I'm also wondering what the inconsistency is between being able to vote in a yearly election and having to be "active" to do so. We're talking about an action that takes 30-60 seconds to complete. It gives the inactive membera feeling like they still have a small voice (kinda like voting in a presidential election and knowing my really small voice didn't amount to much ofanything ). And speaking of active members, how many of them bothered to vote? If I counted right, we currently have 127 active, 37 inactive. Andy's email on the 26th indicated that only 61 had sent votes in. At the time,I was not one of those 61 - I sent in my vote after his reminder note on the Last thing - you wrote that, "if a person doesn't want to send or receive cards, then I wonder why they are in the club." Now I don't know you well, but I know you well enough to be believe you can't possibly mean that way itcame out. To me, this "club" is so much more than merely sending and receiving cards. It's RAOK. It's strangers meeting each other for the first timeand instantly bonding. It's helping out a member in need. It is a shared love for well-loved cardboard. I want to end with my own, "I don't mean any offense." I really don't. I don't often respond publicly to OBC events, but felt the need to do so here. Geor d ie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" To: dodgergeo@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:55:05 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status hi georgie i didnt say it was a low priority, mark did. and i was just saying if that were the case, then inactives shouldnt vote. i still dont think that inactives should vote because they are, inactive, by their own choice. they are not affected presently by the rules of the club or the decisions of the obcac. anyway, i did mean mean any offense, and i dont think mark did either. but to me, you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or youarent. once you go active, you get those privileges back. no one is forced to go inactive, so if it is that important to someone to be able to vote, they can stay active. if a person doesnt want to send or receive cards, than i wonder why they are in the club. if a person wants to receive cards, but never sends any out, then i suppose it is up to each member to decide if they want to send cards to that member. i know there are many members who receive a lot more than they give. so as far as i am concerned, if someone wants to have a say in who runs theclub, they should be active. to say you can vote as an inactive, but you cant be on the obcac seems a bit inconsistent to me. -----Original Message----- From: Geordie Calvert To: Gary Mandell Cc: illini grad 90 ; obc-ramblings ; talbot1 ; obcmac Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Gary, being inactive doesn't necessarily mean that OBC is a low priority, or that the member doesn't care about the direction of the group. I'm sure there are many inactives that still read every rambling and thanks as it comes across the server. Take me, for instance. I was inactive for quite some time because I didn't feel right about getting cards in the mail and usually not being able to reciprocate. I rarely get to card shows or card shops (which there aren't very many of anymore), and even more rarely get access to a fresh supply of vintage dupes, so my incoming mail far outstripped whatwent out. I made the decision to go inactive, and I felt good about it. However, I still read what came across the servers and cheered silently from afar when others announced what was new in their collection. Granted, I'm sure many inactives don't read any of it, and maybe baseball cards are far from their mind. But, that wasn't true for me, and I've got tobelieve I'm not alone in that. Why shouldn't I, or anyone else like me, have had a chance to vote for the direction of this fine group and who runs it? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" < smartalecx@aol.com > To: talbot1@comcast.net , obcmac@hotmail.com Cc: "illini grad 90" < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:27:34 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response. Your response begs the question of whether or not inactive members should be allowed to vote in the OBCAC elections, which I beleive they are currently. If, as you say, inactive status means OBC is a low priority at that time for the member, why do they have a say in who is running the group? -----Original Message----- From: talbot1 < talbot1@comcast.net > To: Mac Wubben < obcmac@hotmail.com > Cc: Geno Wagner < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >; obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I just got this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states " Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC. " I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive rosterhow can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when I had the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior to making that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and felt the need to "hunt down" non responders, I reported to the AC that the majority ofnon responders were already inactive and that I found that there were manyreasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we wentto great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac Wubben" < obcmac@hotmail.com > To: smartalecx@aol.com , "Geno Wagner" < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction betweenactive and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whosecircumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com ; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, iwouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com > To: obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= To: , Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:06:22 -0600 From: Tim newcomb Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status I second Geordie's comments wholeheartedly. I recently went inactive because I had so little time to devote to cards and felt bad about getting cardsand not reciprocating. But I still enjoy reading about OBC exploits and occasionally chiming in. I am fine with not being able to vote if that's the consensus, but I also don't see the point of making a potentially contentious issue where none needs to exist. I mean it's not as if a cabal of inactives got together and tried to swing an OBCAC election in some sinister direction. Best regards to all, Tim Newcomb To: smartalecx@aol.com; OBC-Ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: dodgergeo@comcast.net Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:59:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status no offense taken - I know neither you or Mark intended any. I do respectfully disagree with some of your premises, though. When you say, "... you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or you aren't. Once you are active, you get those privileges back." If I'm reading that right, why bother having an inactive list at all? You're either active, or you shouldn't belong to the group? Really? Seriously, what rights and privileges are we talking about here? Isn't it enough that an inactive member's wantlist is no longer accessible? What other rights and privileges are inactives afforded that aren't warranted? I'm also wondering what the inconsistency is between being able to vote in a yearly election and having to be "active" to do so. We're talking about an action that takes 30-60 seconds to complete. It gives the inactive member a feeling like they still have a small voice (kinda like voting in a presidential election and knowing my really small voice didn't amount to much of anything ). And speaking of active members, how many of them bothered to vote? If I counted right, we currently have 127 active, 37 inactive. Andy's email on the 26th indicated that only 61 had sent votes in. At thetime, I was not one of those 61 - I sent in my vote after his reminder note on the 28th. Last thing - you wrote that, "if a person doesn't want to send or receive cards, then I wonder why they are in the club." Now I don't know you well, but I know you well enough to be believe you can't possibly mean that way it came out. To me, this "club" is so much more than merely sending and receiving cards. It's RAOK. It's strangers meeting each other for the first time and instantly bonding. It's helping out a member in need. It is a shared love for well-loved cardboard. I want to end with my own, "I don't mean any offense." I really don't. I don't often respond publicly to OBC events, but felt the need to do so here. From: "Gary Mandell" To: dodgergeo@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:55:05 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status hi georgie i didnt say it was a low priority, mark did. and i was just saying if thatwere the case, then inactives shouldnt vote. i still dont think that inactives should vote because they are, inactive, by their own choice. they are not affected presently by the rules of the club or the decisions of the obcac. anyway, i did mean mean any offense, and i dont think mark did either. butto me, you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or you arent. once you go active, you get those privileges back. no one is forced to go inactive, so if it is that important to someone to be able to vote, they can stay active. if a person doesnt want to send or receive cards, than i wonder why they are in the club. if a person wants toreceive cards, but never sends any out, then i suppose it is up to each member to decide if they want to send cards to that member. i know there aremany members who receive a lot more than they give. so as far as i am concerned, if someone wants to have a say in who runs theclub, they should be active. to say you can vote as an inactive, but you cant be on the obcac seems a bit inconsistent to me. -----Original Message----- From: Geordie Calvert To: Gary Mandell Cc: illini grad 90 ; obc-ramblings ; talbot1 ; obcmac Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Gary, being inactive doesn't necessarily mean that OBC is a low priority, or that the member doesn't care about the direction of the group. I'm sure there are many inactives that still read every rambling and thanks as it comes across the server. Take me, for instance. I was inactive for quite some time because I didn't feel right about getting cards in the mail and usually not being able to reciprocate. I rarely get to card shows or card shops (which there aren't very many of anymore), and even more rarely get access to a fresh supply of vintage dupes, so my incoming mail far outstripped what went out. I made the decision to go inactive, and I felt good about it. However, I still read what came across the servers and cheered silentlyfrom afar when others announced what was new in their collection. Granted, I'm sure many inactives don't read any of it, and maybe baseball cards are far from their mind. But, that wasn't true for me, and I've got to believe I'm not alone in that. Why shouldn't I, or anyone else like me, have had a chance to vote for the direction of this fine group and who runsit? From: "Gary Mandell" To: talbot1@comcast.net, obcmac@hotmail.com Cc: "illini grad 90" , obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:27:34 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response. Your response begs the question of whether or not inactive members should be allowed to vote in the OBCAC elections, which I beleive they are currently. If, as you say, inactive status means OBC is a low priority at that time for the member, why do they have a say in who is running the group? -----Original Message----- From: talbot1 To: Mac Wubben Cc: Geno Wagner ; obc-ramblings Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I just got this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states "Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC." I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive roster how can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when I had the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior to making that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and feltthe need to "hunt down" non responders, I reported to the AC that the majority of non responders were already inactive and that I found that there were many reasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we went to great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK From: "Mac Wubben" To: smartalecx@aol.com, "Geno Wagner" , obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction between active and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whose circumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, i wouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner To: obc-ramblings Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:18:56 +0000 (UTC) To: Gary Mandell , From: Geordie Calvert Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Actually, I am active (as evidenced by my placement on the current AC ballot). I gather I didn't campaign hard enough? I am sorry you felt the need to pursue votes the way you did. While I'm glad so many eventually cast a ballot, having to chase people down to cast oneis a bit extreme IMO. I've always felt one of the great things about this groups is the clear freedom to participate as much or as little as one wants. If one wants to vote, great. If not, that's cool, too. If one wants to send cards to everyone in the group, fantastic! If one sends cards out to a select few that he's especially close to, that's great, too. BTW, you got it wrong again ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" To: dodgergeo@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 3:08:36 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status thanks georgie and sorry i got your name wrong the first time needless to say, i disagree with a lot of what you say, but it is really a non issue. this is a great club, and i would like to see more active participation. as you may recall, when i ran the elections for a couple of years, we set all kind of participation records. i think over 160 one year. it took some pursuit, and a lot of folks would rather not vote. but just like most all citizens can vote in the US, it is their decision todo so or not. not voting is a vote in itself i always say. anyways, glad you are still interested enough to care even if you are inactive. hope to see you on the active roll again soon. -----Original Message----- From: Geordie Calvert To: Gary Mandell ; Ramblings (OBC) Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status no offense taken - I know neither you or Mark intended any. I do respectfully disagree with some of your premises, though. When you say, "... you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or you aren't. Once you are active, you get those privileges back." If I'm reading that right, why bother having an inactive list at all? You'reeither active, or you shouldn't belong to the group? Really? Seriously, what rights and privileges are we talking about here? Isn't it enough that aninactive member's wantlist is no longer accessible? What other rights and privileges are inactives afforded that aren't warranted? I'm also wondering what the inconsistency is between being able to vote in a yearly election and having to be "active" to do so. We're talking about an action that takes 30-60 seconds to complete. It gives the inactive membera feeling like they still have a small voice (kinda like voting in a presidential election and knowing my really small voice didn't amount to much ofanything ). And speaking of active members, how many of them bothered to vote? If I counted right, we currently have 127 active, 37 inactive. Andy's email on the 26th indicated that only 61 had sent votes in. At the time,I was not one of those 61 - I sent in my vote after his reminder note on the Last thing - you wrote that, "if a person doesn't want to send or receive cards, then I wonder why they are in the club." Now I don't know you well, but I know you well enough to be believe you can't possibly mean that way itcame out. To me, this "club" is so much more than merely sending and receiving cards. It's RAOK. It's strangers meeting each other for the first timeand instantly bonding. It's helping out a member in need. It is a shared love for well-loved cardboard. I want to end with my own, "I don't mean any offense." I really don't. I don't often respond publicly to OBC events, but felt the need to do so here. Geor d ie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" < smartalecx@aol.com > To: dodgergeo@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:55:05 PM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status hi georgie i didnt say it was a low priority, mark did. and i was just saying if that were the case, then inactives shouldnt vote. i still dont think that inactives should vote because they are, inactive, by their own choice. they are not affected presently by the rules of the club or the decisions of the obcac. anyway, i did mean mean any offense, and i dont think mark did either. but to me, you are either active, with all the privileges of membership, or youarent. once you go active, you get those privileges back. no one is forced to go inactive, so if it is that important to someone to be able to vote, they can stay active. if a person doesnt want to send or receive cards, than i wonder why they are in the club. if a person wants to receive cards, but never sends any out, then i suppose it is up to each member to decide if they want to send cards to that member. i know there are many members who receive a lot more than they give. so as far as i am concerned, if someone wants to have a say in who runs theclub, they should be active. to say you can vote as an inactive, but you cant be on the obcac seems a bit inconsistent to me. -----Original Message----- From: Geordie Calvert < dodgergeo@comcast.net > To: Gary Mandell < smartalecx@aol.com > Cc: illini grad 90 < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >; obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >; talbot1 < talbot1@comcast.net >; obcmac < obcmac@hotmail.com Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Gary, being inactive doesn't necessarily mean that OBC is a low priority, or that the member doesn't care about the direction of the group. I'm sure there are many inactives that still read every rambling and thanks as it comes across the server. Take me, for instance. I was inactive for quite some time because I didn't feel right about getting cards in the mail and usually not being able to reciprocate. I rarely get to card shows or card shops (which there aren't very many of anymore), and even more rarely get access to a fresh supply of vintage dupes, so my incoming mail far outstripped whatwent out. I made the decision to go inactive, and I felt good about it. However, I still read what came across the servers and cheered silently from afar when others announced what was new in their collection. Granted, I'm sure many inactives don't read any of it, and maybe baseball cards are far from their mind. But, that wasn't true for me, and I've got tobelieve I'm not alone in that. Why shouldn't I, or anyone else like me, have had a chance to vote for the direction of this fine group and who runs it? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Mandell" < smartalecx@aol.com > To: talbot1@comcast.net , obcmac@hotmail.com Cc: "illini grad 90" < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:27:34 AM Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response. Your response begs the question of whether or not inactive members should be allowed to vote in the OBCAC elections, which I beleive they are currently. If, as you say, inactive status means OBC is a low priority at that time for the member, why do they have a say in who is running the group? -----Original Message----- From: talbot1 < talbot1@comcast.net > To: Mac Wubben < obcmac@hotmail.com > Cc: Geno Wagner < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >; obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Feb 29, 2012 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello All, My Internet service has been acting up of late and I just got this correspondence and felt the need to chime in - forgive me if these points have already been made. The ROC states " Inactive members are not allowed to be nominated nor serve on the OBCAC. " I was a part of the AC when this issue was originally addressed and it makes sense - if you are on the inactive rosterhow can you be active on the OBCAC. I went down the slate of candidates for this election and I believe that ALL on the ballot are active so it appears as if we do not have an issue for this year's election. As for Geno's question about inactive members attending to the membership poll. This is also a topic that was addressed when I had the privilege of serving on the AC although I see that last year they changed the membership poll from twice a year to once a year which makes sense as well. The idea behind not requiring inactive members to respond was simply that they were inactive and the definition of that as we saw it at the time was that inactive meant inactive from all functions of the group including the membership poll. I can also interject that prior to making that change we simply dropped any member active or inactive from the group if they did not respond to the poll. Since I was responsible for the poll in those days and felt the need to "hunt down" non responders, I reported to the AC that the majority ofnon responders were already inactive and that I found that there were manyreasons that they had not responded but no one indicated that they "just couldn't be bothered." For the most part they wanted to remain members but OBC was a low priority for them at that time and that was why they were inactive. So the AC made the decision to exclude them from the poll AND we wentto great lengths to define what inactive membership meant and added an entire section to the ROC as a result. That's the history behind the decision and if necessary the new OBCAC can readdress it - I personally do not see a reason to do so. I still stand in favor of the decisions we made, for the reasons that we made them. BE WELL!!!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac Wubben" < obcmac@hotmail.com > To: smartalecx@aol.com , "Geno Wagner" < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:23:43 AM Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Technically inactive members are not allowed to run for OBCAC. As to Geno's question, I sort of think that once someone is an OBC'er, theyare always an OBC'er. I don't see any value in spending a lot of effort trying differentiate inactive members who are just busy, occupied or overwhelmed from members who won't be active again. I think the distinction betweenactive and inactive is very important...but making demands on people whosecircumstances you don't understand seems unnecessary to me. Those are just my personal opinions (not OBCAC's)...and these issues can bebrought up with the new OBCAC next month. To: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com ; obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: smartalecx@aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:13:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status for that matter, i will re-ask the same question i have asked in the past. why are inactive members allowed to run for OBCAC? if sending/receiving cards (one of the main functions, if not the lifebloodof the group) is not something that an inactive member cares to be part offor the time being, and answering a simple yes/no question once a year is no longer required (if I understand Geno correctly), then why should we assume that an inactive member has the time, inclination or interest to committhe amount of time and attention necessary to direct the club? i have NO doubt that many of our inactive members have wonderful ideas on how the club should be run. but is it unreasonable to ask for a certain level of commitment to ALL of the activities of the club in order to have the privilege to be involved in the direction of the club as well? maybe something for the incoming OBCAC to address once again? personally, iwouldn't mind seeing a non-binding referendum held on the issue. gary mandell -----Original Message----- From: Geno Wagner < illini_grad_90@yahoo.com > To: obc-ramblings < obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sun, Feb 26, 2012 9:18 pm Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Fellas -- Just wondering...why are Inactive members not required to answer the Membership Poll? They are members...they just don't want to send/receive cards. The only email the are required to get is the OBC-Announcements if that's still correct. It doesn't seem overly burdensome to require an answer to thatsingular email once a year. Otherwise, how does somebody who just quits ever come off the Inactive List? How do you know any of that info is any good? Just thinking out loud... Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:33:55 -0800 (PST) To: VCT Mailing List , From: Mike Mackie Subject: Favorite Sets Tournament - Round 1, Matches 1 to 8 Hi everyone I want to celebrate Leap Day by kicking off Cardboard March Madness - aka the favorite sets tournament. 64 of the best sets of all time will square off in a tournament that will crown our all time favorite set a month or so from now. There is no definition of what "favorite" means. I'll leave that up to individual interpretation, which is part of the beauty and fun of this. Preliminary discussions and selectionstook placeon VCT over the past few weeks, but now that the field is set I'm opening the voting up to all my cardboard collecting friends. The first eight matches are set on the following webpage. Voting can be done sending me an email with your choices in each match (I'm not high-tech enough create online polling). Winners advance, losers are out. http://macknife13.weebly.com/favorite-sets-tourney.html This first group features some interesting pairings, including the Cereal Bowl pitting a couple of Kelloggs sets. Voting for Matches 1 thru 8 closes Friday, March 2 at 11:59pm CST. Results be announced Saturday when the polls open for Matches 9 thru 16. If you to take a sneak peak at the rest of the field, the links are below: http://macknife13.weebly.com/favorite-sets-tourney-group-2.html http://macknife13.weebly.com/favorite-sets-tourney-group-3.html http://macknife13.weebly.com/favorite-sets-tourney-group-4.html This should be fun! Mike Mackie ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:16:31 -0800 (PST) To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Geno Wagner Subject: inactive status Geordie, Tim -- What you guys are describing is the exact example of what Inactive Status should be. You're still around, but too busy for cards. That way I know if I send you something, I shouldn't be annoyed if I don't hear from you for awhile. I think Inactive guys should have full voting rights - no problem with that. However, I do believe EVERYONE should respond to the membership poll or be dropped. Maybe I'm a hard ass, but it's the only way to eliminate names who never want to participate again. If they decide to come back, it's easy enough. Maybe I have OCD, but I want our roster filled with guys who want to participate, either actively or inactively. Take Care, ================= To: , Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:21:36 -0600 From: Tim newcomb Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hey Geno, I completely agree-- it takes ten seconds to respond to the poll and I can't imagine why someone couldn't do it if they want to stay on the books evenas an inactive member. PS: I imagine you've been suffering over the fortunes of the Illini in pigskin and hoops -- or have you given up on them altogether? To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:16:31 -0800 Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Geordie, Tim -- What you guys are describing is the exact example of what Inactive Status should be. You're still around, but too busy for cards. That way I know ifI send you something, I shouldn't be annoyed if I don't hear from you for awhile. I think Inactive guys should have full voting rights - no problem with However, I do believe EVERYONE should respond to the membership poll or be dropped. Maybe I'm a hard ass, but it's the only way to eliminate names who never want to participate again. If they decide to come back, it's easy enough. Maybe I have OCD, but I want our roster filled with guys who want to participate, either actively or inactively. Take Care, ================= Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:01:04 -0800 (PST) To: apspr@msn.com, obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com From: Geno Wagner Subject: RE: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status I haven't given up on my beloved Illini, but I'm considering going inactiveon them! Two implosions in one year... Take Care, On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 8:21 PM CST Tim newcomb wrote: >Hey Geno, >I completely agree-- it takes ten seconds to respond to the poll and I can't imagine why someone couldn't do it if they want to stay on the books even as an inactive member. >PS: I imagine you've been suffering over the fortunes of the Illini in pigskin and hoops -- or have you given up on them altogether? >To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com >From: illini_grad_90@yahoo.com >Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:16:31 -0800 >Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status >Geordie, Tim -- >What you guys are describing is the exact example of what Inactive Status should be. You're still around, but too busy for cards. That way I know if I send you something, I shouldn't be annoyed if I don't hear from you forawhile. I think Inactive guys should have full voting rights - no problemwith >However, I do believe EVERYONE should respond to the membership poll or bedropped. Maybe I'm a hard ass, but it's the only way to eliminate names who never want to participate again. If they decide to come back, it's easyenough. Maybe I have OCD, but I want our roster filled with guys who wantto participate, either actively or inactively. >Take Care, ================= Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 07:14:08 +0000 (UTC) To: Geno Wagner From: talbot1@comcast.net Subject: Re: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Hello Geno, I appreciate that you hold a strong conviction for your position and that others may agree with that position. I just want youto be aware that there are others including myself that feel just as strongly that flexibility and understanding should be the approach when making decisions about the responsibilities of inactive members. My position comes directly from my interactions with inactive members over a 2 -3 year period when it was my responsibility to conduct the membership poll for theOBCAC. During most of that time if a member did not respond we simply removed them from the group and I felt that to be extreme so I did everything I could to personally contact members individually with emails, phone calls and personal letters when they did not respond to the membership pollrequest. When I did get in contact with these members I found that almost without exception that the members did not want to leave the groupandhad good reason why theycould not respondsuch as;they were experiencing email difficulties, they had pressing family or personal matters that took precedence, they were overwhelmed with other responsibilities and simply didn't respond and so many more. Fundamentally they want to still be affiliated with OBC but be inactive - and the former OBCAC defined that inactivity to include not having to respond to the membership poll. I believe that to be a decision what was well thought out and took into account the sensitive issues that required some membersto go inactive in the first place. If I recall it was not unanimous but a majority decision with some on that AC holding your position Geno. You are on the current OBCAC Geno and I propose that you take a straw poll during your first month of the new AC members on this issue andI believe that you will find that this is an issue that people are definitely divided on. I would not be in favor of changes that would remove members for not responding to a poll - I believe it to be harsh and needless for someone who has already declared that they need to go inactive. Here are some hypothetical for you to consider : I would hate to see Joe Denning removed because he is serving our country and spends whatever limited time he has on the Internet to stay in contact with his familyand he neglects to answer our poll. Is it fair to remove Brett Domuebecause his position overseas makes it nearly impossible to stay abreast of OBC happenings, I think not. I contacted an inactive member (whose name I will omit for his privacy) who had just returned from an extended hospital stay and was unaware of a poll but would have felt terrible and hurtif he had been removed, is that what we want? Please I ask that you consider this issue carefully as a great deal of attention went into making the original decisions. I suggest that it is not as cut and dried as responding to a membership poll and that the current system takes that into account. So Geno -I guess if you consider yourstance a "hard ass" position I suppose you could call mine a "soft ass" position or perhaps in jest a "candy ass" position, nonetheless I am just as strongly attached to it and I'm sure the debate can continue for some time to come. I am fully confident that the duly elected OBCAC will act in all of our best interest and I will abide byany decision that is made - I just wanted to be certain that you were aware that there is more than just Geno's position to consider. BE WELL!! REGARDS ------------------- MARK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geno Wagner" To: obc-ramblings@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:16:31 PM Subject: [OBC-Ramblings] inactive status Geordie, Tim -- What you guys are describing is the exact example of what Inactive Status should be. You're still around, but too busy for cards. That way I know if Isend you something, I shouldn't be annoyed if I don't hear from you for awhile. I think Inactive guys should have full voting rights - no problem with However, I do believe EVERYONE should respond to the membership poll or be dropped. Maybe I'm a hard ass, but it's the only way to eliminate names whonever want to participate again. If they decide to come back, it's easy enough. Maybe I have OCD, but I want our roster filled with guys who want to participate, either actively or inactively. Take Care,