Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0!
Ack, I can't believe I didn't thank everyone as well. Thanks to all that contributed comments, no matter how large or small! Hugh Falk wrote: > > It looks awesome! And is now up on my site as well. Thanks Jim...and > thanks to all who helped make this possible. > > -Original Message- > From: Jim Leonard [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:55 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject:[SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0! > > "C.E. Forman" wrote: > > > > > 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-) > > All BM jokes notwithstanding, here is MobyScale > version > 1.0! This is the version to run with; it's official. I'll be converting > text > on MobyGames' list section to match these. > > No doubt there will be a typo here or a comment there; I will amend 1.0 to > something like 1.0.1 when/if it occurs. > > Enjoy! > -- > http://www.MobyGames.com/ > The world's most comprehensive historical PC gaming database project. > > -- > This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to > the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' > Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/ -- http://www.MobyGames.com/ The world's most comprehensive historical PC gaming database project. -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/
RE: [SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0!
It looks awesome! And is now up on my site as well. Thanks Jim...and thanks to all who helped make this possible. -Original Message- From: Jim Leonard [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0! "C.E. Forman" wrote: > > > 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-) All BM jokes notwithstanding, here is MobyScale version 1.0! This is the version to run with; it's official. I'll be converting text on MobyGames' list section to match these. No doubt there will be a typo here or a comment there; I will amend 1.0 to something like 1.0.1 when/if it occurs. Enjoy! -- http://www.MobyGames.com/ The world's most comprehensive historical PC gaming database project. -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/
[SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0!
"C.E. Forman" wrote: > > > 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-) All BM jokes notwithstanding, here is MobyScale version 1.0! This is the version to run with; it's official. I'll be converting text on MobyGames' list section to match these. No doubt there will be a typo here or a comment there; I will amend 1.0 to something like 1.0.1 when/if it occurs. Enjoy! -- http://www.MobyGames.com/ The world's most comprehensive historical PC gaming database project. The Official MobyGames Software Collectables Condition Grading Scale Version 1.0 The inevitable legal notice: This document and its contents is Copyright 2000, MobyGames.com. It was authored by Jim Leonard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), based on a scale created by Hugh Falk, which in turn was based on a record album grading scale of unknown origin. Any questions, comments, or suggestions should be directed to the author. You are free to copy, translate, reformat, and retransmit this text as long as these notices are included and the content is left unchanged. - Background: The world of software collectables is an emerging hobby that is slowly easing into the mainstream. However, being so new, there is no standard scale for grading the condition of an item, which can lead to the misrepresentation of an item's value. Before this grading scale was formed, a multitude of other grading notations were found: One list used a single rating for the entire item, another used a numerical rating for quality grades, yet another wildly overused the term "MINT!", etc. This lack of standardization can lead to confusion when trying to assess an item's value based solely on a textual description of the item. Which grading scale is the right one? MobyGames.com believes there's a better way to do this, and has created a standard grading scale and specification for cataloging software for collection lists. This system is officially in place at MobyGames.com, but it is our hope that it is embraced by the collector community and used universally to describe item condition. Through widespread acceptance of this scale, we hope to eliminate misconceptions and confusion in the software collectable community. This document describes The Official MobyGames Software Collectables Condition Grading Scale and its use and application. For brevity, the condition grading scale will be abbreviated as "MobyGames Grading Scale" throughout the remainder of this text. Also included at the end of the document are some frequently-asked questions, and an example collector's list to illustrate the system in use. - Item Breakdown: Before describing the actual scale, it is important to define how the scale itself is used. A common practice for new collectors is to assess the overall quality of an item and give it a singular value. This may save the collector time, but creates confusion for other collectors attempting to view his list. This is because not everyone values certain aspects of an item the same. For example, one collector may value the condition of the box above all else, while another may value the manual and included trinkets/props/feelies higher than the box. Because of differing opinions of value, it is usually inappropriate to give items one overall grade. The solution to this is to apply a grade to as many pieces of the item that are relevant. This creates more work, but is the only way to ensure accuracy and avoid unintentionally misleading people who read your lists. For example, the most common pieces of a software collectable are: - Box/Packaging - Original Media - Manual - Reference Sheet - Catalog - Registration Card - Additional Items (listed individually) The more pieces that are graded, the better the representation of the item. So while you can get away with a single grade for the entire item, a suggested minimum would be two grades: One for the Box/Packaging, and another for all other materials contained in that item. Note: You can still use and advertise the MobyScale if you only list a single grade for the overall item -- but it is highly recommended that you provide at least two grades (usually one grade for the box, and another for its contents). Other collectors will thank you for it. - Condition Grades: The following are the official condition grades of the MobyGames Grading Scale. The possible conditions an item can be in are: - Mint Sealed (MS): No noticable defects and sealed in original factory or store shrinkwrap or sticker. The best grade possible. - Near Mint (NM): No noticable defects, but not sealed. - Fine (F): One or two slight defects (small scratch, slight worn corner on box, etc.) that prevent a Near
Re: [SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0?
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 "BattleTech: The Crescent Hawk's Inception", and the poster = >I've heard is in some of Interplay's "Dragon Wars". Since these items = >were not normally included in all packages, a package can still be = >considered >complete without them... although one that does have them is far more = >desirable and could stand to be noted as such. LMK what you think. I'm not sure there's a good way to generically indicate this. I think it would have to require knowledge that an interested party might not have. I didn't know about your two examples, for instance. The only example I can think of is the extra "limited edition" booklet that was included with the first release of X-Wing. (I've got that one.) On this topic, anyone have a complete collection of all the badges that came with Ogre (based on the Steve Jackson board game)? If you don't know what I'm talking about, there was about six different badge designs and each package only contained one badge. -- Lee K. Seitz * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://home.hiwaay.net/~lkseitz/ Wanted: | Visit the Classic Video Games Nexus Vintage Pac-M*n necktie| for all your classic link & news needs! Lib*rator T-shirt |http://start.at/cvgnexus -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/
RE: [SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0?
I agree with everything below. I too am waiting for the final scale (with the changes we last agreed upon) so I can upload my updated site. By the way, I have a Dragon Wars with the poster. It is the same as the box cover (but 4 times bigger). Let me know if you want any details. Best regards, Hugh -Original Message- From: C.E. Forman [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 6:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0? Hey gang, I'm finally geared up to re-open Ye Olde Infocomme Shoppe, but am holding out on one last thing: the MobyScale. I just have this horrible fear that two or three days after I bring the Shoppe back up, someone will suggest a change to the Scale, my pages will become instantly outdated, I'll have to update them, and by that time I'll be swamped with deals and won't get around to it for days. So I was hoping we could go over the scale one last time, see if there are any more changes to make, make them if there are, and finalize version 1.0 of the MobyScale, which will hopefully last us for several months at least before any additional modifications are required. One suggestion I would like to make is to modify the "Excess Defects" rating to not include "missing box". This may be accurate if one is grading the entire package as a single unit (which the MobyScale does advise against). However, when grading game parts seperately using the full or abbreviated form of the scale, I'd prefer not to rate something that isn't even there. I think it's more logical in this case to either rate only the props, or to use the "IM" notation as a place-holder to indicate that the box is missing -- "IM/VG", for example. 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 "BattleTech: The Crescent Hawk's Inception", and the poster I've heard is in some of Interplay's "Dragon Wars". Since these items were not normally included in all packages, a package can still be considered complete without them... although one that does have them is far more desirable and could stand to be noted as such. LMK what you think. Other than this, I am satisfied with the current scale, but am open to suggestions from anyone who has them. Thanks. Looking forward to announcing the new system soon! << File: ATT3.htm >> -- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/
[SWCollect] MobyScale 1.0?
Hey gang, I'm finally geared up to re-open Ye Olde Infocomme Shoppe, but am holding out on one last thing: the MobyScale. I just have this horrible fear that two or three days after I bring the Shoppe back up, someone will suggest a change to the Scale, my pages will become instantly outdated, I'll have to update them, and by that time I'll be swamped with deals and won't get around to it for days. So I was hoping we could go over the scale one last time, see if there are any more changes to make, make them if there are, and finalize version 1.0 of the MobyScale, which will hopefully last us for several months at least before any additional modifications are required. One suggestion I would like to make is to modify the "Excess Defects" rating to not include "missing box". This may be accurate if one is grading the entire package as a single unit (which the MobyScale does advise against). However, when grading game parts seperately using the full or abbreviated form of the scale, I'd prefer not to rate something that isn't even there. I think it's more logical in this case to either rate only the props, or to use the "IM" notation as a place-holder to indicate that the box is missing -- "IM/VG", for example. 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 "BattleTech: The Crescent Hawk's Inception", and the poster I've heard is in some of Interplay's "Dragon Wars". Since these items were not normally included in all packages, a package can still be consideredcomplete without them... although one that does have them is far more desirable and could stand to be noted as such. LMK what you think. Other than this, I am satisfied with the current scale, but am open to suggestions from anyone who has them. Thanks. Looking forward to announcing the new system soon!
