this seller has some high end stuff

[estott]

Walt, the guest poster is from the UK board and posted as a guest because he didn't thoroughly understand the workings of this board. You are laying your ironic tone on pretty thickly and I think undeservedly so.

For my own part I HAVE tried to contact you privately but with no results yet. If I've done something to tick you off particularly would you please tell me what so I can set about righting that particular wrong?

[Neophone]

Folks,


Let's cool off. That guest post should not have been approved, sorry. Not that there's anything wrong with the opinion expressed, but posts like that made anonymously rarely contribute positively to a discussion.

Part of our mission here is to assist new collectors with advice and when necessary-warnings, yet we must always be cautious of of the misspoke aspersion. It is a difficult track to follow, but we must balance between the two.

Some of you may recall back at the beginning of this iteration of the TMF I was posting links to various on-line articles I found that I felt would be of interest to us all. I was publicly criticized for the inclusion of one particular article, but I was not originally presented with specific reasons for the complaint. After having to ask for specifics I was presented with some genuine issues involving the article. Unfortunately is caused a small amount of unnecessary negativity to be displayed here.

Now let's move on......

Regards,
John

[Steve]

LOL..."Anonymous advocacy"...You gotta love it. (The time of day, irregular use of the ellipses, etc., give you away, however...)

I would prefer to write you in private, but your "Guest" post only allows me to reply in public.

No one has said that an opinion should not be expressed. The statement, "I'd be suspicious" is intended to communicate a caution and it does so quite effectively. It does not matter whether the language used is actually in the first person or not. The expressions "I'd be suspicious", "I am suspicious", or "You should be suspicious" all communicate a warning.

If people want to express opinions that are intended to warn others, that can be good and beneficial. But if that opinion is expressed using something vacuous like "be warned" or "I'd be suspicious" and do not tell what it is to be warned of, don't expect others to stand on a silent platform as the reputation of someone else who isn't even present to defend themselves is damaged or brought into doubt.

It wasn't intended to be "anonymous advocacy" I can assure you; my PC had kindly logged me out for some reason without my being aware and the post was submitted BEFORE I'd even noticed it. So my apologees go to Neophone for giving him the dilemma whether to allow it or not. I agree too that we should all move on and agree to disagree about both this machine and estott's original expression of opinion about it.

[Valecnik]

It wasn't intended to be "anonymous advocacy" I can assure you; my PC had kindly logged me out for some reason without my being aware and the post was submitted BEFORE I'd even noticed it. So my apologees go to Neophone for giving him the dilemma whether to allow it or not. I agree too that we should all move on and agree to disagree about both this machine and estott's original expression of opinion about it.

Actually a similar thing happened to me some time back. I don't know how it happened. I recall having to go through some extra steps as I was trying to post. Checked my posting and it had been posted as a guest post.

[1926CredenzaOwner]

!

[Steve]

Is... there... something... wrong... with... irregular... use... of... ellipses...?

Nothing at all so long as you're regular with their usage. And I note you are regular: 3 dots after each and every word, that looks pretty darn regular to me! Come to think of it, I'm not so sure what was so irregular about their usage in my original post anyway?

Their use (all of twice) was to ably demonstrate that the quotations were incomplete, but just as importantly that the content of the same, was not as important as the use of the singular 'I' at the beginning of each, in the context of what we were then discussing ie. the right for someone to hold a personal opinion and share it!

[OrthoFan]

I'm wondering if anyone, who knows the seller of the prototype gramophone, might get in touch with him concerning the machine's provenance. I'm not questioning his word, but I'd like to know what documentation exists to support that this is, indeed, an untouched prototype; for instance, patent application drawings, personal letters, etc. Certainly, whatever information is available would be a welcome addition to historians of phonographs/gramophones.

[Steve]

I think someone already has? I'd been surprised if any exists and the seller has chosen to not include it in the listing. Given how the audience for something like this will naturally be full of doubters with a lot of very awkward questions, I would have thought it was obvious to include anything which backs up the provenance of the machine. In this instance (machine and price), the paper work will be the making or breaking of the deal, I reckon. Never under estimate the value of provenance.

[OrthoFan]

I think someone already has? ....

Hi Steve:

I just looked over the post string regarding this gramophone on your site, and so they have! Many thanks. So, in the final analysis, there is no provenance or document trail; only the word of the party the seller acquired it from.

As you note, for many collectors, the provenance--especially for this type of item--is very important.

I have to say, personally, I wouldn't refuse it if someone wanted to buy it and give it to me as a gift. (When what freezes over?)

[JohnM]

Is... there... something... wrong... with... irregular... use... of... ellipses...?

Nothing at all so long as you're regular with their usage. And I note you are regular: 3 dots after each and every word, that looks pretty darn regular to me! Come to think of it, I'm not so sure what was so irregular about their usage in my original post anyway?

Their use (all of twice) was to ably demonstrate that the quotations were incomplete, but just as importantly that the content of the same, was not as important as the use of the singular 'I' at the beginning of each, in the context of what we were then discussing ie. the right for someone to hold a personal opinion and share it!

In typesetting, they are typed: . . . (space-period-space-period-space-period-space)

not: ... (period-period-period)

Open 'em up and let 'em breathe, fellers!