Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-06 Thread C.E. Forman
> I wonder how you get through the day NOT supporting BM. ;-) BM is optional, you said so yourself. I choose not to use it. B-) -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing l

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-06 Thread Jim Leonard
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > >2. The C modifier is mainly for unopened packages, although you might > >arguably use it when rating a box. (Will this lead to people > >(incorrectly, IMO) rating boxes as "NM, (C)"?) > > This I'd interpreted to mean any box, since it doesn't specifically > say sealed

RE: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-06 Thread Hugh Falk
That was it for me. -Original Message- From: Jim Leonard [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 8:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review "Lee K. Seitz" wrote: > > Jim Leona

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-06 Thread Lee K. Seitz
Jim Leonard boldly stated: > >> 3. The IM and MMC modifiers are used when grading an entire package, >> although from the examples IM can be used as a separate "grade" when >> there's no item of which to state the condition. > >Uh, I don't understand what you mean by "IM can be used as a separate

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-06 Thread Jim Leonard
"Lee K. Seitz" wrote: > > Jim Leonard boldly stated: > > > > >Each grade can also have a modifier associated with it: > > > >- Sealed (S): Sealed with original factory (or store) shrinkwrap or sticker. > > >- Compressed (C): Package has been crushed or compressed. > > > >- Torn Wrap (T): Sealed

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-02 Thread C.E. Forman
>1. The S and T modifiers are only used for grading an unopened package. That's how I understood it. If the wrap is torn enough for the box to be opened, it can't be rated sealed. "T", if I follow correctly, means sealed (not opened) but the wrap isn't perfect. >2. The C modifier is mainly f

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-02 Thread C.E. Forman
Okay, you've convinced me. Makes sense. I do have to say, though... >use BM when you know it because that condition affects the value to some >collectors. [...] >I guess the point of BM (and why I support it) [...] >Ultimately, you can ignore BM if you don't think you'll never need/use it. ..H

RE: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread Hugh Falk
Wednesday, November 01, 2000 3:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review Jim Leonard boldly stated: > >Each grade can also have a modifier associated with it: > >- Sealed (S): Sealed with original factory (or store) shrinkwrap or stic

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread Lee K. Seitz
Jim Leonard boldly stated: > >Each grade can also have a modifier associated with it: > >- Sealed (S): Sealed with original factory (or store) shrinkwrap or sticker. >- Compressed (C): Package has been crushed or compressed. > >- Torn Wrap (T): Sealed package has tears in the shrinkwrap. > >- It

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread Jim Leonard
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > >This is true, but you don't have to use the modifier if the status isn't > know. > >In other words, you'd only use Bad Media if you *knew* the media was bad > (of > >course, it would be painful to note such a condition, but you'd do it in > good > >conscience if you were

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread Jim Leonard
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > Oh, and, but now that my initial reaction has passed (again, I'm sorry, :) Our internal applications at the bank have, coincidentally, abbreviations of GAS and FECES, so it was only natural (snicker) to non-coincidentally name our internet security team the Firewall Adm

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread C.E. Forman
>This is true, but you don't have to use the modifier if the status isn't know. >In other words, you'd only use Bad Media if you *knew* the media was bad (of >course, it would be painful to note such a condition, but you'd do it in good >conscience if you were listing the item for sale or trade).

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread Jim Leonard
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > Oh, and, but now that my initial reaction has passed (again, I'm sorry, > Hugh), I thought > of one additional thing to expand upon: > > > - You would have to check your media on a regular basis to make sure it is > > still working (even if you don't normally touch the p

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread C.E. Forman
Oh, and, but now that my initial reaction has passed (again, I'm sorry, Hugh), I thought of one additional thing to expand upon: > - You would have to check your media on a regular basis to make sure it is > still working (even if you don't normally touch the package), and in doing so you would h

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-11-01 Thread C.E. Forman
> Maybe we want to make Bad Media (BM) a modifier? *Snicker*... Um, it's a good idea, makes sense, but... could we maybe find a different abbreviation? I just can't help thinking of the *other* thing "BM" stands for when I see it. (I know, I'm so freakin' immature. B-) Sorry... B-) --

RE: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-10-31 Thread Hugh Falk
to make Bad Media (BM) a modifier? -Original Message- From: C.E. Forman [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 1:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review Looks great to me. No problem with the not-in-all-package

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-10-31 Thread Jim Leonard
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > Looks great to me. No problem with the not-in-all-packages items, I can do > without and it'd be less confusing anyway. > > Any last-minute changes, speak up now! I have no further changes... anyone else? -- http://www.MobyGames.com/ The world's most comprehensive his

Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-10-31 Thread C.E. Forman
Looks great to me. No problem with the not-in-all-packages items, I can do without and it'd be less confusing anyway. Any last-minute changes, speak up now! -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed

[SWCollect] MobyScale 0.3.0 -- please review

2000-10-31 Thread Jim Leonard
"Lee K. Seitz" wrote: > > C.E. Forman boldly stated: > > > >Also, an optional modifier we might consider adding is one for those = > >rare items included in some, but not all, game packages, for example the = > >lapel pin and Ral Partha order form in the first 5000 copies of = > >Infocom's "Battl