An Open Letter to the War Relics SS Forum and a Note of Thanks to David Delich

[ajax3985]

Thank you for your comments. This highlights exactly what I am speaking of, namely, that one needs to take on some sort of "risk" in order to share an item and some information. Under this modus operandi one would be averse to posting anything of merit and, consequently, the bullies and Internet braggarts would be victorious in their operations to suppress and control knowledge. The change in insignia is not the the problem, the question posed about it is not a problem, the ramping up to hysterics about "who did this" is what is at issue. Innuendos.

The Polaroid photo was posted by the original poster, so, yes, he was acutely aware of its presence in the digital realm. In this place, we endeavor to separate the crooks and isolate them from the members. In no way am I implying that anyone is a crook here, however, there have been those in the past who try to sow seeds of doubt and paranoia in an effort to devalue collections and dissuade competing collectors.

Now I understand what your saying. Unfortunately its too late to prevent that, and with that risk and you can certainly control your gene pool on a forum to a degree for credible people, but I do not think I can name one guy that wont get knocked while asking 3 people and its just the way it is and the way its always been. An advanced collector therefore has to be careful to not devalue or even destroy an item by introducing it and that means knowing what can be devalued or destroyed.

Truth be told, a lot of these guys who open fire are in fact morons and are not smart enough to have a modus operandi to devaluate an item or even know what modus operandi is without a search engine. Now I am being generic here and pointing no fingers with that, but it is true. It has no doubt gtten worse over the last five years so I can appreciate what you try and do to protect yourselves now that I understand you better.

[Friedrich-Berthold]

Mr. Ajax, is this your core idea of your several posts?

If I am boiling down your essay in an unfair manner, do bear with me.

"An advanced collector therefore has to be careful to not devalue or even destroy an item by introducing it and that means knowing what can be devalued or destroyed. "

If this is, indeed, the case, then I am sorry to write that I do not agree with you, nor does your concept accord with the purpose of this site. Dr. CMH and I take a different approach, and I think we are proud of it. You are free to dissent, but I am not sure you will find many here who take your view. I know that Adrian Stevenson does not,

though I do not speak for him, of course.

On the contrary, we do all we can to share.

[Friedrich-Berthold]

"Truth be told, a lot of these guys who open fire are in fact morons and are not smart enough to have a modus operandi to devaluate an item or even know what modus operandi is without a search engine. Now I am being generic here and pointing no fingers with that, but it is true. It has no doubt gtten worse over the last five years so I can appreciate what you try and do to protect yourselves now that I understand you better. "

Here you and I can perhaps find some common ground. But, in fact, some of these "morons," as you describe them, do have a modus operandi and a modus procendi
to assault others, to belittle those of whom they are jealous and to call into doubt knowledge that is too complex and uncomfortable for them.

Dr. CMH and I deal with knowledge professionally, and so we try to bring this idea and practice here. Of late, the effort has been uphill.

Thanks for your posts and I hope some others will add their view.

[ajax3985]

Mr. Ajax, is this your core idea of your several posts?

If I am boiling down your essay in an unfair manner, do bear with me.

"An advanced collector therefore has to be careful to not devalue or even destroy an item by introducing it and that means knowing what can be devalued or destroyed. "

If this is, indeed, the case, then I do not agree with you, nor does your concept accord with the purpose of this site. Dr. CMH and I take a different approach,

and I think we are proud of it. You are free to dissent, but I am not sure you will find many here who take your view. I know that Adrian Stevenson does not,

though I do not speak for him, of course.

On the contrary, we do all we can to share.

It is the case and has been for years as there is a risk in posting certain items and a possibility that any item will be devalued or mired in controversary. This is not to say it is a failure of this forum or any other and it is can be for several reasons such as ego, agenda, personalities, etc. it has played out many times. You also have to consider that just because a site does not have issues as much as another that they are free of any probalems that others may be burdened with as well.

Of course you are free to disagree but there is a fair amount of examples where items were in fact devalued and I am not quite sure how anyone would take an argument otherwsie, at least one that has been around a while to watch. I can assure you that advanced collectors can and do avoid posting items on forums and are well aware of this issue. But again this is not to besmirch WRF or any individual forum or administration as much as it is an observation.

[ajax3985]

"Truth be told, a lot of these guys who open fire are in fact morons and are not smart enough to have a modus operandi to devaluate an item or even know what modus operandi is without a search engine. Now I am being generic here and pointing no fingers with that, but it is true. It has no doubt gtten worse over the last five years so I can appreciate what you try and do to protect yourselves now that I understand you better. "

Here you and I can perhaps find some common ground. But, in fact, some of these "morons," as you describe them, do have a modus operandi and a modus procendi
to assault others, to belittle those of whom they are jealous and to call into doubt knowledge that is too complex and uncomfortable for them.

Dr. CMH and I deal with knowledge professionally, and so we try to bring this idea and practice here. Of late, the effort has been uphill.

Thanks for your posts and I hope some others will add their view.

Yes, but an M.O today and even years ago requires more than one man. You cannot co-ordinate and alias or single alias and do any real damage to another unless that person with that alias has a strong reputation himself in a given area and speaks from that expertise. In reality its easier to do from a known source with a solid reputation, but to garner that reputation often means a gentlemans demeanor as well and that goes to reputation or character.

It is the pack or tag team that can destroy or harm an individual or an item, and that is not often co-ordinated, it is usually the culmanation of a feud and there is generally smoke from the target to begin with out of sloppiness or misdealings. So while I could take a swipe at someone due to an agenda, unless I am recognized it will not hold very much water. I believe in many cases some of these shots are not well thought out and are often conditioned responses to forum behaviors learned and seen, and somehow an effort to answer correctly first as if there is a prize, and in some cases stupidity and lack of knowledge.

So, even here where I misunderstood your issue it was not because im dumb, it was your termonology used related to an item and not a person so I was lookimg at it and wondering why you were so upset as the harm was minimal if any, but lookimg at the names commenting and the fact they had no real credibility with me personally and from previous posts either there was no harm that I could find.

For someone with an M.O looking to discredit someone for sport or agenda he will leave a trail and a profile run will will show it most often. And someone smart enough to go after a real crook in such a manner needs a team, a motivated team of real people. So its not that easy to do and can be very difficult as you dont know what the other side is doing and one of your own guys can trip up. Its been done but it cant be common and the target would have to be dirty.

[DrCMH]

It is the case and has been for years as there is a risk in posting certain items and a possibility that any item will be devalued or mired in controversary. This is not to say it is a failure of this forum or any other and it is can be formseveral reasons such as ego, agenda, personalities, etc. it has played out many times. You also have to consider that just because a site does not have issues as much as another that they are free of any probalems that others may be burdened with as well.

Of course you are free to disagree but there is a fair amount of examples where items were in fact or devalued and I am nit quite sure how anyone would twle an argument otherwsie, at least one that has been around a while to watch. I can assure you that advanced collectors can and do avoid posting items on and are well aware of this issue. But again this is not to besmirch WRF or any individual forum or administration as much as it is an observation.

Thank you for your kind response. I think what FB and, certainly what I, are trying to state is that we are striving to create an environment where collectors, and particularly advanced collectors, will feel more enjoined to post their materials. As you state, advanced collectors do avoid posting things on line and we are trying to rectify this. We do this, not for financial gain, but for the gain and dissemination of knowledge. A unique item that is posted will, ideally, foster a discussion amongst interested collectors and perhaps the bits of evidence that have been scattered to all corners of the globe can be analyzed here. While no one here is claiming that one must accept an item on blind faith, I am of the opinion that when an individual whom all experts defer to posts an item, it is highly unlikely that the item is bogus. Calling the item into question as being tampered with, and especially with a perceived sense of judgement, without all facts regarding the piece is reckless. I am sure you have been collecting for a long time and I would imagine you have been at the receiving end of this type of destructive behavior as well. I hope that will never be the case here, and if it is, I believe the moderators will intervene on your behalf.

[ajax3985]

Thank you for your kind response. I think what FB and, certainly what I, are trying to state is that we are striving to create an environment where collectors, and particularly advanced collectors, will feel more enjoined to post their materials. As you state, advanced collectors do avoid posting things on line and we are trying to rectify this. We do this, not for financial gain, but for the gain and dissemination of knowledge. A unique item that is posted will, ideally, foster a discussion amongst interested collectors and perhaps the bits of evidence that have been scattered to all corners of the globe can be analyzed here. While no one here is claiming that one must accept an item on blind faith, I am of the opinion that when an individual whom all experts defer to posts an item, it is highly unlikely that the item is bogus. Calling the item into question as being tampered with, and especially with a perceived sense of judgement, without all facts regarding the piece is reckless. I am sure you have been collecting for a long time and I would imagine you have been at the receiving end of this type of destructive behavior as well. I hope that will never be the case here, and if it is, I believe the moderators will intervene on your behalf.

What you wish to acheive is possible but like anything else is really a matter of time and getting a team together to do it it very difficult as no matter how well you co-ordinate others will look at and see something else. I am a bit weird with forums, I hit every one daily and I actually read them and most often say nothing. So if there is an argument or issue with an item and it comes up I am usually familiar with and can return to the source with frame of reference.

It also allows me to associate names or an alias with a post or a personal knowledge asessment, so if a guy knocks a piece I can discount him or read his post, or even correct him. But I am not perfect either and will ofter short putt an answer to avoid the why's and on occasion speak too quickly myself.

So today its a log in, I spot the locked thread and the follow up letter thread and I went to the locked and scanned, then over to the letter thread and back. Re-read the locked thread 3 times, took the names, rated them, looked at FB and his response and locked in on Larcenous, attributed it to the item and the issue was libelous and that would have explained his ire. But I went to the cloth and the people with the knocks and the one with the photo and discounted any damage, which of course made the FB post more curious. A lot of this is misunderstandings.

[BOB COLEMAN]

It is time to put this behind us and move forward as there is nothing positive being created.

[youthcollector1]

Hello all; please know I did my absolute best to let things cool down and withhold further statement for the better of this forum. My commenting back in the other thread would've done nothing to help anyone, but since the situation won't go away and my intentions and morals are being called into question I feel as if it must be addressed.
First and foremost, all information we strive to learn comes from someone or somewhere else. For example, I've seen many times where Wim, d'alquen and others post a document that is later used by others. Nothing wrong with that one bit. They posted it on a open-free forum and I assume did so to help all of us have a better understanding of the things we collect. FB has even used my pictures of my items in the past I posted here without asking to which I've never complained or demanded an apology...simply because, one wasn't warranted whatsoever.
Furthermore, though many documents are graciously translated by member HPL2008, which I thank him for, he can't do them all...it wouldn't be fair to him. I'm a Native American though, English is my first language and since they aren't in English or even modern German, I've had to spend countless hours matching up the barley legible old German script and translating them myself. That's all I take credit for--rightfully so I think--and I do it only so that I can learn more about my hobby. I could careless if others know what I do or what I own. With all due respect, I make no apology for that, and nor should I have to.
More importantly however, never once was I questioning or accusing David D. of restoring the insignia(rank tab) on the afore mentioned tunic. As noted, the picture was taken in 1968 while it WASN'T in David's possession. Obviously sometime between then and when David purchased it the insignia was switched, but never once did it cross my mind it was David....not even in the slightest. I was only curious as to why it was done seeing it didn't make any sense to me. All it was-was a hypothetical question as I haven't a clue who did it.
Finally, ANYTIME I post outside my own collection and know who to credit I always do so unless it's something already found in the thread at hand. In fact, even when I rarely post at the WAF I'll inform everyone there what information I got from here or anywhere else. I'll be happy to direct anyone to those few post if need be.
I respect all members here for their unique contributions and do my best to walk away if needed. It's just not worth distressing our hobby in my opinion to fight among ourselves. Nonetheless the record needed to be set straight so that ALL forum members know A) I wasn't accusing David of switching the rank tab...who knows how many people owned it before he did since 1968: and B) the claim I'm taking credit for other individuals work is utterly false and unfair.
Please, FB included, reread my comments in said thread....they haven't been altered and somehow are being read completely out of context.
As most of you know I recently lost my Mother--she was only 58 years old--and it has been the single most difficult experience I've ever faced. I have NO reason to coverup what I said and as far as I'm aware, my membership isn't in jeopardy one bit. I'll always speak my mind and stand behind my statements. Yet even so, I'm willing to put it on her name in no way did my comments mean how some are interrupting them and I don't say that lightly.
****
I just noticed jealously is being used a motive for something I didn't even do. I can assure you to which those who know me can attest I'm not a jealous person....giving, yes....jealous, no. There's no question I've been a very lucky individual and have been blessed with many blessing all my life...some that were given and some that I worked for, but all which I'm eternity grateful for. Sorry but saying I'm jealous is totally ridiculous and a tad egotistical.
Thank you all for your time. Dr., I couldn't agree more with your original words and am very sorry for detracting from them. You have my word I'll do my best not to do it again.

[BOB COLEMAN]

OK. If we can not move on voluntarily, this thread needs to be closed.