Stu; If all those posts in this thread before mine have not spelled out to you what a slab is ... and all the valuable search information that is available in the bb archives over the past couple of years..., I doubt that this post will make any difference ... but I'll give it one last shot before I give up entirely on you.

"The chips in question do not seem to meet the definition anymore than a set of KISS chips placed in a case by the Palms and sold as a set."
I was not aware that the holders which house the Palms Kiss chips have set the standard for what constitutes a slab.
I'm really not familiar with the set of Kiss chips you speak of, or their holders ... but is the Kiss set of chips encapsulated in a sealed case that must be destroyed and phyically broken apart to remove the chips ... or are they in a plastic snap-lock holder? Were the Kiss chips submitted to a outside 3rd party for a fee to assess an opinionated grade and encapsulation prior to being offered for sale? If so, who were the graders?

Regarding 'confrontational'... "I honestly wish I could adequately express to some of you that this isn't my intent."
It may not be intended Stu; but that's the way you come across to this bb reader.

>>>You seem to want to hang on and challenge every word in The Pledge rather than to accept the spirit in which the language was drafted

"The pledge isn't just a general statement against slabbing (which it doesn't define). The language is very specific. Maybe some folks will attach their name to anything, but I won't."
That's fine Stu. You've already told us that; several times now. The Pledge isn't for everyone.

"I expect things to be well reasoned and logical. "The pledge" is neither and I find any defense of its language rather absurd."
Perhaps you expect too much ... or is it that any defense of the Pledge by others that does not match YOUR standard to be "absurd"?

>>>Personally, (as one of the "good ole' boys") ... I support The Pledge 100%.
"That's perfectly ok with me."
Wait a minute Stu ... didn't you just say in the previous breath that any defense of the pledge language is absurd?

" ... You are going to some trouble to explain why you think I am wrong."
I never said you were wrong ... and it's no trouble Stu. I look upon it as an attempt at education for others who are reading both sides of this exchange and they can make up their own minds. I simply can't understand why after all these posts you still remain "confused". I accept the fact that you are not a supporter of The Pledge. Why can't you just let it go at that? There are lots of folks like you who can't or won't accept the Pledge ... nor can they support the relatively long list of supporters who have. It does not make them right or wrong ... nor are the people who signed the pledge right or wrong. It's what they believe.

>>>I'm sure that you'll probably have a problem with that club policy position taken also.

"How can the club enforce a policy against "slabbed chips" without defining exactly what constitutes a "slabbed" chip?"
That one is easy Stu ...; become an elected officer of the club and then you can establish club policy if you can convince the majority of your fellow club officers to vote with you. I guess it's a little bit like defining pornography Stu, ... hard to define; but when we see it most of us know what it is... including the convention dealers. Do you think that a chip placed in an snap-type holder with some descriptive comments inserted by the owner is the same as a slab? I certainly don't.

You may have the last word Stu, as this will be my last post on the subject which has been thoroughly beaten to death. It's been fun.