2021 Topps Heritage Baseball Forum

Best evidence.

   Dan, why are you so angry? None of what I said was to make you mad. What I want is consistency (didn't this just get discussed in the "Hot Box" thread). I want to have corrected updated checklists, cards added to the Database that should be here, and cards taken away that shouldn't (don't exist or incorrectly listed). I thought that is what everyone wanted?
   And Jason: And nowhere does it say photos aren't allowed. Maybe for Image purposes:
That's exactly what the photo is being used for  Image purposes, it is where cards go, not photos

Well he just joined, yeah I just joined in Nov. 2020 to catalog my cards. I have been coming to this Website (then Trading Card Database) since at least 2011. Now I don't know all the rules, and doubt that I ever will, especially if they keep changing.

And I just don't get on forums and run my mouth, I get things done. Had checklists added, cards added, cards taken away, looked at 1000's of cards on COMC & Ebay to help out, likely submitted more than 1000 prices for cards on here. And you still want to be mad at me?

It took me 40 minutes to become an L6 on here and if my scanner was hooked up I would already been an L8. I had no desire to become an L8 on here, but it does appear that I'll have to.



   

 

All we see on here is "But this is on here, why can't this too?" Because one thing is wrongly listed doesn't mean other stuff should be too.

The wrong backs should NOT be listed. Unless Topps comes out and says, yep, it was an intentional gimmick, and here are the x number of cards we did it to". IDGAF what else is on the site. We're talking about THIS SET, and ONLY THIS SET. Stop dragging other topics into these threads.

Again, what is already on the site doesn't matter when talking about adding new things to the site.

That's why I'm angry. Because no one seems to know how to focus on the topic at hand - and everyone wants a freaking exception for their item.

You see something you don't think should be listed, review the FAQ for the current rules. If it doesn't fall within the rules/guidelines, enter an IR (and quote the FAQ page). If it's questionable, leave it be. Don't drag it into a thread about a different set. Since we're talking about wrong backs for a 2021 set, let's talk about the 1962 green tints and the 1982 blackless also. Or how about those 1981 Fleer "finger" cards? Let's just drag up everything we feel is a little "off" for being here in this thread. That makes a lof of sense.

I started this tread as way to discuss, no sense getting upset over it at all. I personally think we should list as an insert set even if Unintentional it is Quite obviously a bigger thing. There doesn't seem to be a reason not too at this point. 

Regardless of what you "personally think", the site's rules state that they should not be listed.

No. The image you linked, and submitted an IR for, is a scan. Not a photograph. The listing is a photograph. And there is no rule against the listing of photographs if they fit the scope of the site. This will get off topic, but since you've been so nice about everything...

Not long before you submitted that IR, two more had come through regarding removing listings of photographs. I put one of them forth to remove the images so that it could be deleted. Admin has final say on image deletion, and denied it, asking that we study the rules and guidelines on photographs being listed, to better define them. He actually did the same thing with postcards at the same time, which is where the "Do you list postcards?" item in the FAQ came from - a review of that topic.

Believe it or not, I actually agree with you on this. So, when your IR came through, instead of it being processed, denied, and lost forever, I simply asked that no one take action on it yet. Once guidelines in print justify keeping or removing it, it can then be processed. That's why it's still there. I volunteered to Admin to be the one to draft possible guidelines to be approved or amended by him before being made site policy, just like I did with postcards, since I received the message that the original IR was denied.

So, again, allow me to reiterate my previous point. Photographs are not allowed for images. That is the only place that photographs are mentioned in the FAQ. That means pictures taken of the listed collectible. Scans are what is permitted. A scan is what is in place there. Currently, nothing about that listing violates any site guidelines. Once a guideline is established for photographs, it can be revisited.

Anyone can draw their own interpretation of things in the FAQ to fit whatever they want, I suppose, but it seems to me to things in this thread that I've mentioned (wrong backs and photographs) are spelled out pretty well. But perhaps that's just on my end. I suppose I'll just sit back and wait for the next chance to run my mouth instead of getting anything done...

well its a trading card site not a court so maybe a breather is in order. 

But it does have rules. Learn the rules, follow the rules.

In an attempt to calm things down and restore some organization here...

Yes, the site has known error cards, both corrected and uncorrected. No, the site does not document printing flaws unless EVERY instance of a specific card has that same printing flaw and the company acknowledged it (examples: 2005-06 Upper Deck Ovechkin/Carter Young Guns checklist and 1995 Pro Line Mark Carrier Carolina WR). If a bad batch missed a foil stamping or had a back fed the wrong way or something similar, but other batches before and after have everything as expected, we don't document those mistakes. There are sometimes cases where there are enough examples where it may be worth it to document them at some point, but there's thorough research done first before a decision is made, it gets presented to Admin to confirm it's OK, and he makes the final decision on whether or not something can be listed here. Right now, we're still researching. Topps says it wasn't intentional, but it seems like we have the same errors in the same location of the same types of packs. It's possible this was a bad batch.  If we see these same cards turning up two months from now when more boxes are distributed, then it's possibly a gimmick that can be listed.  WE DON'T KNOW YET.  We're asking collectors of this set to be patient until it's determined whether or not these errors can be listed. In the meantime, please keep track locally on your computer, your device or good ol' classic pen and paper.  "eBay has them", "they're selling well", "I found them in 20 packs", "they seem to be the same error every time" .... all good thoughts, but there are still rules, research and processes that need to be followed first.

Hopefully this helps a little.

Mark, this is not said to make you mad either, just stating...don't be shocked if you come with sarcasm that you get an annoyed response. Happens to me too often in the real world and its harder online to make sarcasm work well....now, ...just say, "Yes, Dad."