... do you? Do you have in your collection any repaired chip, Borland or coin inlay fake, fantasy chip, known counterfeit or any chip of questionable or doubtful authenticity?

Apparently, you think it is OK for:

>> ... a hobbyist ... to remove a cigarette burn from a chip in their personal collection ...

Whether you like to admit it or not, that's a "repair". Is it then not OK to have David Whalen (or someone else) remove it for the hobbyist?

>> It's time that SOMEBODY has the courage to stop playing word games
>> and put the blame squarely where it belongs ...

Well, blame for what exactly? Has there been a complaint that someone has been sold a repaired chip without disclosure that it was repaired? And please don't lump the fake brass cores in here -- they are not chip "repairs" and I have already made quite clear what I think of people who sell them without disclosing their true nature.

>> ... and that is with the people who are ordering this bogus and repaired
>> stuff from the Mr. Whelens of the chip world for whatever their reasons are.

You continue to use references to the brass cores ("bogus" stuff) to support your position regarding repaired chips, but the two are completely different issues which should be discussed separately.

In any event, I take it that it is your position that anyone who orders a chip repair from David Whalen (or anyone else) should be "blamed" for doing so. Assignment of blame, of course, implies that something should be done about it.

So, Archie, exactly what club sanction do you think should be imposed on someone who has one of his own personal chips repaired so that it looks better in his own private collection?

>> Jim; You said;
>> "What I do with my chips is my business (whether I do it myself
>> or have someone else do it for me). What you do with yours is yours.
>> As long as we don't deceive someone else about what we've done, no
>> one has any basis for complaint."

>> That may be true, legally speaking, Jim.

No "may be" about that.

>> But I believe there is an overwhelming
>> COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION who disagrees with you.

Well, let's find out, Archie. Will you be signer #1 to the following pledge?

I will NOT buy or trade for any repaired chip.
I will NOT have any repaired chip in my collection.
I will NOT buy ANY chip from any dealer who sells repaired chips.
I will NOT do business of any kind with any dealer or who participates in any way in the repairing of chips.
I will NOT buy from or trade with any collector who participates in any way in the repairing of chips.

No waffling, Archie. No exceptions. No removing cigarette burns. No removing hot stamp cancellations. No flattening warped chips. No smoothing of edge nicks. No regluing loose inlays. No removing stray marks. No restoring color to faded chips by using mineral oil or any other substance.

>> Mr. Whelen would not be producing this bogus crap if he did not have orders for it.

More apples and oranges here, Archie. "Repaired" chips are not "bogus". They are real chips that have been restored (more or less) from some form of damaged condition. This is not the same thing as producing a chip which never existed.

And if there is such a demand for David Whalen's chip repair services, where is the overwhelming court of public opinion against it?

>> I think club members (like yourself) should really think deeply about
>> what they are doing to the hobby by causing all this unrest with
>> the attitude "what I'm doing is no business of anyone else."

There wouldn't be any unrest if club members (like yourself) weren't fomenting it. Where are the complaints of fraudulent sales of repaired chips? Who has been harmed by the repair of any chip? And none of that "what may happen in the future stuff" -- give me a concrete example of actual harm that has already occurred, if you know of one.

>> "The club" keeps taking the heat about how long this issue
>> has been dragging on, yet Whelen keeps pumping out this junk.

Again, Archie, you're lumping together two entirely separate subjects. "This issue" (repairs of damaged chips) has not been "dragging on" at all. In fact, as far as I know, there is no "repaired chip" issue. There is no complaint. There is no investigation. There is no action pending. And "the club" is taking no heat on the subject.

The issue about which there have been complaints regarding the club's actions (or lack thereof) is the "non-genuine" brass cores. Totally different subject. My report on that subject -- and the club's actions on it -- have nothing to do with the repair of damaged chips.

>> I personally think there should be more outrage against Whelen and those
>> who continue to order his custom made creations ... and less heat towards
>> "the club" for not fixing this impossible problem. We all know
>> where the problem lies ... and it's not with "the club"... it's
>> with non-club member David Whelen and his customers.

Again, Archie, David Whalen's "custom made creations" have nothing to do with chip repairs, which is, after all, the subject I was addressing in this thread.

And, with respect to his "customers", many of them are club members. Do you remember the names on The Rat's list? This list includes those who, according to The Rat, either bought fake brasscores from Whalen or had him repair chips for them. Only one person objected to his inclusion on these lists (I have omitted his name here) and I have good reason to believe that the rest of the list is accurate (though now incomplete, as there have since been new chip repair customers).

What punishment do you suggest be imposed on those who ordered Whalen's "custom made creations"? According to The Rat (and in the case of Gene Trimble, self-admitted), this would include: henry garrett, joe bennon, armin pfaender, bill akeman, mel jung, alex garcia, walt gonski, scott hartman, gene trimble, charlie crate.

And what punishment do you suggest be imposed on those who order chip repairs rather than "custom made creations"? According to The Rat, this would include: joe dolce, mike spinetti, dick allard, rich burgel, jim rauzy, david sarles.

>> I'm done with this thread.

Of course, Archie, I can't force you to continue the discussion. But, I am not asking these questions just to irritate you. Or even to try to change your mind. If there are reasonable answers to them, I'm sure there are club members who'd like to hear what they are. But, the subject should be addressed with clear-headed precision, particularly if the end result is going to be that some people may be subjected to club sanctions for their activities.

----- jim o\-S