Site Forum

To all, today I noticed a 60 point decrease in my points so I asked Admin what was the issue.  As it turned out, scans in the 1991 and 1992 multi sport Allan Kayes sets that I had submitted were missing the gold and silver edges on the front and the back scan was missing the white paper edges. To start, if you have any of these still in sheets of 9 cards, you will see that thereis no definitive edges beyond the orange or blue rectangles on the front and the black line outline on the back. I believe that is what I had cropped to but fair enough, some member wanted the gold and silver edges so I have rescanned them and uploaded them for the cards I have.

The issue here though is that, had I not queried Admin, I would not have known that these scans had been reported inaccurate and therefore deleted. Whoever did so could have contacted me and told me of the inaccuracy so that I could have then uploaded them all again. If I was a repeat offender of poor or iniaccurate scans, then I could understand.  But if this is obviously a set issue, then you could have contacted me directly; I would not have been offended, welcomed the observation and respected you for it.

Oh well, to each his own....

I asked a related question the other day in the forums. What is the proper etiquette for replacing scans? Here's my personal procedure. As I go through a set, if I notice a poor or inaccurate scan I do the following steps:

1. Check out the other scans from the user in the set.

2. If the users scans are generally acceptable, I replace the scan without notifying admin. I did this recently with the scan of 1968 Topps football Bob Griese. The card in the original scan had an obvious crease. All the other scans from this user appeared ok and since the user that uploaded the original scan I replaced the card without trying to contact them. However, since I did not notify admin they kept the points.

3. If the users other scans are not acceptable, I make an attempt to contact the user, try and get opinion of other users through the fourm, and then contact admin to have the cards removed (I have not done this yet).

Although I do replace scans, I don't do it for the points. I only replace scans to make the site better. For point totals I only expect points from cards where I have uploaded the original scan.

I do have a scanning pet peeve though. I have come across users that have uploaded just the back/front of a parellel set without uploading a scan of the front/back that has the difference. (Topps collection for example). Its obvious that the user has the base set and is using the side of the card without the variation to get scan points. I know this is technically not wrong and it does add images to the database, but I do find it frustrating especially since cards without images are hard to come by for vintage collectors like myself.

I would never notice a small drop in my points. But if it has ever happened I would never know. Is there a log that shows your points going up or down?

No log that I now of. It was only because I was so close to 45,000 that I noticed a drop of 60 points. I also just noticed yesterday another 3-point drop.  I can't see Admin having the time to notify members each time there is a drop. A log would be nice.

Not overly concerned about points, but those that are a log would be nice but others things needed should be a priority.

Admin might be able to set up an automatic message notification to the uploader if an image is removed.

I am all for anything that will improve the users visit to the site.

I do have a scanning pet peeve though. I have come across users that have uploaded just the back/front of a parellel set without uploading a scan of the front/back that has the difference. (Topps collection for example). Its obvious that the user has the base set and is using the side of the card without the variation to get scan points. I know this is technically not wrong and it does add images to the database, but I do find it frustrating especially since cards without images are hard to come by for vintage collectors like myself.

This is a major pet peeve of mine, because it allows room for error when there are even slight differences on the back of the card between parallel versions. In the case of more recent Topps baseball sets, there is sometimes a difference in the Code # on the back of the card. Of course, this is often to small to read with the scans that are put up on the site, but it still bugs me for whatever reason.