I like space fillers. I think a descent one (as you described) is worth about 5% of CV. So if CV is $20 or more, it might be worth a dollar to somebody.
K2 catalogs for $60 used and $25 MH. The premium for used would likely apply only to undamaged stamps, so take 5% of $25. I'd say you threw away a stamp worth $1.25, but once you factor in fees and postage, it may not have been worth the trouble to sell. The real problem is verifying that the overprint wasn't a fake. The stamp isn't worth a cert, so that remains an issue. However, it wasn't without ANY value. I take stamps like that and toss them in a box for donation to an organization that gives stamps and supplies to kids to get them interested in collecting. A space filler is better than nothing to some of those kids.
I would prefer a space filler myself in a few cases. For example, I don't have an O69 $5 US State Department Official stamp. CV for MNG is $3750. You might be able to find a poorly centered one with a pulled perf for $1000. I have a card proof in that spot that I paid $10 for. I would pay $100 myself for an O69 with damage similar to your K2. I would be surprised if such an item sold for less than $200 (if it had a cert).
Lars
Years ago, I put together a chart of how to tell a stamp's condition/grade based on its attributes. It was posted on BidStart. I don't know if it's still there. I'm not sure I still have the file for it as I had a hard drive crash since then. I do have a printed version of it somewhere around here and could scan it.
Tim, or anyone else, could the scan of this document be placed in the exhibits or other appropriate area? Many people found it useful over at BS. I just have to try to find it.
i also don't mind SFs, either to fill a space or provide a cancel or showcase color ranges or.....
I think Lars' 5% CV is near the high end of what i would consider for something other than pulled perfs or thin on reverse. In these two paragraphs, I'm refering to the stamps alone.
As I'm primarily a cover collector, a stamp's condition there is of less concern. pristine is better, but the stamp itself is often the least important aspect of a cover, which might be, instead, a tied seal, transit markings, auxiliary damage markings, the route, the rate, etc.
David
A Damaged British Guinea would be better than no British Guinea.
But heavily cancelled, torn, scraped or otherwise manhandled common stamps are not usually worth the cost of the hinge.
I agree with Charlie to a point and usually round file anything I run across that is torn, clipped, heavily thinned, cut off perfs, etc. etc. Even man-handled, cat & dog handled, and even in my case, wife handled are of no value. But I make a major exception when it comes to anything of great value, like a $5.00 Columbian. I would be an idiot to round file one of those because it had a cut off corner. I do not have one in my collection and gladly pay the 5% of CV to have it, even man-handled, or cat & dog handled, but I won't tell my wife. I would not want it damaged any further. So there is some threshold for Space Fillers and probably there is some different acceptance level for each collector of what the threshold is. I have an idea of what mine is and then throw away anything under that level. Anyone is welcome to pick up my trash if they want to go through it. Could be some real treasures in there. The flies are also free.
I give the space fillers to my two grandsons (3 and 5 years of age). They get to see what stamps are, get to place them in stock books, and no need to worry about their heavy-handedness and the possibility of damaging the stamps. The oldest is proud of his little collection. The youngest is just getting started.
"Years ago, I put together a chart of how to tell a stamp's condition/grade based on its attributes."
Michael,
I would certainly be interested in the chart. Sounds like a great reference tool.
Okay. I'll dig through and try to find it. Hopefully the electronic copy survived the crash, but I'm not too optimistic.
Michael - you are right, it could be scary if something happened to me. I think she would pile them all up and light the match. I have some PCS Gold Commemorative FDC's that she like's and that keeps me out of trouble most of the time. I think it is really a case of getting attention. Any competition for it is a bad thing. But I muddle through it.
General rule of thumb: The % of Catalogue Value a damaged stamp brings is usually determened by the CV. The higher the CV, the higher the % the stamp will bring.A 10,000 cv stamp will bring a higher % than a 1,000 one , and so on... There may be some exceptions. It seems that valuable US stamps in low grade, bring a higher %, than do their European counterparts. I believe that is true because European collectors, are less interested in damaged rare stamps, than are US collectors.
I would say that a damaged rare stamp is better than not having the stamp in any condition. As far as less valuable stamps, I think it would be wise, to wait until you can afford a decent looking one. Ted.
Your damaged stamps, if not being kept as space fillers, are always welcome by the Holocaust Stamps Project, which just surpassed the 3 million mark, as of 7/30/13. The website is scheduled to be totally updated in mid-August at which time it will reflect the new total of 3,002,897, more than 25% of the goal of 11 million. Thanks to all who have donated duplicates, common, and damaged stamps already!
I found the chart. I actually found both versions - the original from 2008, and then the edited one from 2011 with the stamp grades added for reference. I believe I saved them as Word document in web format. Can SOR handle that?
To me a spacefiller is in the eye of the beholder. I am particular what is covered on the stamp in cancellation, so spacefiller to me could be a bad cancel. If the stamp has a major thin or tear then to me it is also a spacefiller. If I have an empty space with little or no chance of ever purchasing a copy of a stamp, then spacefiller or not it's collected and is duly noted in the book to replace. Very faded or extremely off color (not listed) could be classified as a spacefiller to me too! Since I believe I'm a tad nit picky I usually would not put a spacefiller in my book, and currently I have none in my collection. Perry
Turns out I *didn't* throw away the US offices in China K2 used. I just found it. It's still clipped on the bottom corner - go figure! LOL
I don't collect US at all - Scott lists it at $50 - so what's that make it $2 max?
Anyone want it? (Just msg me if you do)
Kelly
If you collect China, it would fit in there too.
Michael - indeed it would - so it's open for grabs for whoever wants it for their US or China as a spacefiller. I still feel bad that the corner got ripped - but it is a nice stamp.
Kelly
actually, in my experience at shows and on internet; SF's run 10% of cv. 5% seems to be on the low end, I have a U.S. #144 that has the side sliced off; catalogs for $2000.00, I believe , even 5% of that is $100.00. Spacefillers are pretty much the only way I can
get Hi-v stamps.
Gee, maybe I ought to have put it on auction - may have seen a bidding war! Lol
i think that's on the high-end, Carl. I am an admitted bottom feeder, but i think 5% is a good amount to pay for a high-value, difficult-to-get stamp.
I see sound US Scott 73, valued at around $50, often going between $5 and $10. They are not centered well (most aren't), but still sound. A clipped or torn corner, in my view, makes it worthless.
David
I actually have the bottom piece that ripped off - technically it could be "repaired"
Some time ago, I read a discussion on condition. A collector should try to improve the quality of his or her collection based on desire and affordability. As Charles pointed out the 1c British Guiana has all four corners clipped, but it is unique. As an aside, the owner is serving life in Pennsylvania for Murder. I am not sure of the status of the stamp.
The assumption of constant improvement is the foundation of the catalog value, which is the benchmark we all use to evaluate our collection. Normally a torn stamp is not collectible except as a space filler, but the collection is yours to form. In breaking down other collections, I am appalled at the poor condition some stamps are in. I think our hobby needs more information about paper preservation techniques.
Les
I saw the British Guiana #13 at Interphil '76 in Philadelphia. A very nondescript stamp, but a wonder to behold it was never-the-less!
Les, Mr. Dupont died in November 2010 while serving his prison sentence. The estate is being liquidated and there were rumors that the British Guiana #13 was going to go on the auction block. I haven't heard anything else about it for several months now.
Here's some more information.
http://johnapfelbaum.blogspot.com/2010/12/one-cent-british-guiana.html
For US stamps, I find that the higher the CV the higher the percentage for a descent "space filler". US Stamps with a CV of $100 can indeed be had for 5% with some flaws, but a stamp with a CV of $1000 is more likely to go for 15 to 20%. Even a major flaw would likely go for 10%.
I have been tracking one US stamp in particular for almost 10 years now with a CV of $3250 to see what range it trades in. The absolute LOWEST price I have seen in all that time is a poorly centered stamp with a pulled perf and a thin that went for almost 30% of CV.
A Back of Book stamp I've been tracking for over 5 years catalogs for $3250 as well and has similar results.
Even these observations are skewed by the grade used for CV. If you were to use the REAL catalog value from the value guide (based on the centering of the stamp) instead of the default (F-VF) in the main catalog listings, you may discover that space fillers go for a lot more than you thought for high CV items.
Michael,
If you send me the chart I'll post it on the site for you.
Regards ... Tim
Michael,
Can you email me a copy as well?
Lars
Michael, Thank you for doing the research on British Guiana #13. Interesting that the state of Pennsylvania can incarcerate someone for committing a crime and then claim the estate to pay for the incarceration. Actually it sounds like a Bill of Attainder which is prohibited in the Constitution, especially since he was a wannabe traitor.
I always use the Scott Specialized by Grade values for older stamps. I would like to see more articles on preservation and repair. I cannot help but believe that our present and past methods of collecting has damaged many stamps.
I guess the real answer to the original question is: It is a space filler if there is someone who wants the damaged stamp to fill a space.
The "Bill of Attainder Clause" which has either never or almost never been actually used since the Constitution was written, is intended to prevent laws similar to those often employed in the UK to punish a specific person or family by the King or Queen, usually for some act of treachery and almost always after the fact.
The Pennsylvania reimbursement law or regulation is likely to be applied to all similar criminals who have been convicted of a crime, not a particular person, and is not written after the fact.
Of course since most convicted criminals are for all practical purposes bankrupt to start with there is little reason to move against them unless they have a sudden inheritance or windfall from a book or something.
But thanks, Les, I have been waiting for years to discuss that provision which, I bet not one in a hundred Americans or even members, who are usually better informed that the average bear, have ever noticed it, beyond its mention in the Declaration of Independence as one of the listed complaints against George III.
"Bill of Attainder" , who would of thunk it?
I’m with Charlie on this as I believed I would never
live long enough to discuss this subject.
Although never used or even attempted, Canada’s
federal government does have the power to
override the nation’s Supreme Court to enact
criminal law with retroactive application.
Attainder exists in Canada’s federal civil law, has
been used, and may be used again and again.
Stamp collectors residing in Canada are at risk,
technically and otherwise, of forfeiting their stamp collection,
in whole or in part, to those ever-grasping hands
of Big Government.
Shows you how small we “little people†really are.
John Derry (too small and bureaucratically beat up to even be considered as a filler)
Thanks Charlie. Always a pleasure to discuss the Constitution. My argument is that the law punishes the family or heirs by seizing property that was not related to the criminal activity. While it isn't written ex post facto (after the fact) and apparently applies to all persons incarcerated in Pennsylvania, its capricious and selective enforcement acts like a bill of attainder. The property should have been seized when Mr. DuPont was incarcerated and placed in an escrow account to pay for his incarceration with the balance going to the heirs. In effect it is an open ended fine for a crime.
Also note that any criminal act coming under the broad auspices of the RICO (narcotics and racketeering, generally) Act can result in the legal fiction of charging your property with a crime, and upon "conviction" (usually a slam dunk), the seizure for governmental uses or sale at auction with the money going into law enforcement coffers.
So do not peddle drugs, launder money, cross state lines for multifarious bad acts unless you leave your stamps some place else.
" .... While it isn't written ex post facto (after the fact) and apparently applies to all persons incarcerated in Pennsylvania, it's capricious and selective enforcement acts like a bill of attainder. ...."
I agree completely about the Capricious and Selective nature of such law, rule or regulation.
I just love meeting someone who knows what a "Bill of Attainder" is.
Next on my rhetorical bucket list, I want to find someone who can explain what a "Natural born" citizen is.
perhaps by explaining what an un-natural born citizen is ?
When I read the Constitution, or other traditional writings, I see the truth in the trite saying;
" .... You may think you understood what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you think you heard is not what I thought I meant. ...."
I am sure Tom Jefferson would agree.
Charlie, I think the framers meant to say "native born" . I do not recall reading any discussions about the phrase. I suppose they were concerned about loyalty of future President.
In the few places where it is discussed it is explained as a way to prevent any member of the established ruling aristocracy of Britain or France from becoming the chief executive of the fledgling nation.
They feared Kings and Emperors.
It was a part of their desire to put out the "Not Welcome" sign to Dukes, Counts or Princes looking for a new fiefdom that is also reflected in Article One, Section 9, Clause 8,the clause that prohibits royal titles of nobility, (Federal) and Article One, Section 10, Clause 1 that prohibits States from creating such titles. There is also a prohibition of receiving gifts or awards from foreign nations without specific permission from Congress.
So, if some general or statesman is offered an award such as the "Victoria Cross" or "Croix d'Guerre" they need a resolution from our Congress. The Founding Fathers were very fussy about such things.
If a veteran fought in Viet Nam for six months or was wounded or killed, the (then) government of Viet Nam awarded the Vietnam Campaign Medal and that was approved by Congress.
I agree that had they written "Native Born" instead it would have been just as effective and eliminated any discussion as to whether a person born elsewhere even to an American citizen might attain the presidency.
That discussion will be significant were Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada (Not Kenya) to seek the office and should that develop you can bet it will reach the USSC for a binding decision.
His birth mother was/is (?) a US citizen but his father is/was a Cuban.
Is he a "Natural Born" citizen ?
Was a news of his birth sent by secret Western Union telegram from Havana to Canada so that his parents could insert a notice in the Calgary newspapers at the right date and a birth notice filed with the Alberta Clerk's Offices so that if he ever got the chance he could run for president ?
Maybe they should have chosen Honolulu for the bogus birth certificate ?
That does sound rather far fetched, doesn't it, but there are people who will believe such nonsense under certain circumstances.
This is way off topic, but fun.
While I do not subscribe to the claim that President Obama was born in Kenya, he still would have been a citizen because his Mother was a citizen. Just as Ted Cruz is a eligible despite his birth in Canada. If she had registered President Obama with the US embassy in Kenya then there would have been a record of his birth in Kenya. She did not but he did re-enter the United States from Indonesia. There must have been a passport issued to her/or him for them to go to Indonesia and return. After all, John McCain was born in Panama (Canal Zone)which is not native born but a natural born citizen via his parents.
I do kind of wish that the issue had been taken up and settled by the US Supreme Court, but given what they did in Bush vs Gore in 2000, I really do not know how they would have ruled. What about a C-Section or an in-vitro fertilization or anonymous sperm donor, are those natural births? And there is the other issue that paternity can be disputed but maternity is certainly known.
".... This is way off topic, but fun. ..."
Yse, fun for people who enjoy delving into the more obscure and often unfathomable clauses of our beloved Constitution and who will often take an opposing view just to promote the conversation.
The problem with this clause is several fold.
The first problem is that other than preventing the Marquis de Layfayette, the "so-called" Count Kasimir Pulaski or Baron von Steuben perhaps for snarky reasons buried in the dustbin of history, no one actually knows what "Natural Born" really meant to Jefferson as he penned the lines.
Perhaps it referred only to people who were vaginally born ?
No C-section babies need apply ?
Now it may have meant citizens born outside the legal confines of the United States were not to be considered "natural born" regardless of the citizenship of their parents and that is why in 1790 a law was passed and later amended that declared that children " .... hereafter born outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.... " would be considered US Citizens which implies that the Constitution's writers considered such children not to be US citizens without the added law and its amendment.
If that is applied loosely there are a lot of Filipinos who can claim US citizenship if they or their parents were born while the Philippine islands were under US jurisdiction.
There were a series of Insular Decisions about 100 years ago that seemed to declare that the Constitution follows the flag, but only partly.
Talk about confusion.
Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines were only partly subject to or protected by the words of the Constitution.
That then brings up the question of whether a member of one of the Native American tribes, born on an independent reservation is, or is not, a natural born Native American.
What a can or worms this wording and subsequent legislation creates.
The Panama Canal Zone seems to have been outside the limits of these united states, but not quite outside the jurisdiction before 1980 when the canal was returned to the Panamanians to play with.
What would be ironic and perhaps a great show would be watching the so-called Strict Constructionists justices of the USSC struggling with a literal interpretation of the Constitution looking for the exact words that would allow a similar minded presidential candidate take office if he were born in Calgary or Yellowknife of an American citizen mother and a displaced Cuban refugee father.
The John Stewart Shows that week will be a hoot.
And if we ever get that phrase figured out we can turn our attention to the part that says, "... at the time of the adoption of this Constitution..."
Is there anyone, not a vampire, alive today who was a natural born citizen in 1790 ?
Or even a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
The word "natural" is simply redundant and means nothing. It meant nothing then, and means nothing now. I am sure if the founding father would have to witness all the BS that is read into that little word these days, they would get a good laugh out of us. In addition, the paragraph has a comma in the wrong place, and with few adjustments and improved grammar the paragraph reads in its most obvious meaning:
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
So how hard is that? (Even got to use the new strike through format.) Of course, a proposed constitutional amendment to clean up these clerical errors in the wording, would have no chance in this political environment. Instead, rather put our energy in trying to find meaning and intent where there clearly is none.
@Rhinelander, Not true! I'm confident that Jefferson foresaw (as did Jules Verne) that one day in the future there would be "Test-Tube" babies. So he knew what he meant when he penned "Natural Born."
On what do you base your confidence, "tuscany4me"?
John Derry
If you are born in the US or naturalized you are a citizen, but if the former, not necessarily natural born.
If you are born in the US to parents that are citizens you are natural born citizen.
If born in US to aliens you are a citizen but not natural born.
If born outside US to parents that are citizens, that is debatable in my opinion. You are definitely citizen, but not necessarily natural born (as some argue).
And of course only if NOT owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty.
I remember the good nuns at both grammar school and high school stressing that it was important to be able to diagram sentences to determine their clarity and meaning.
There are several sentences or clauses in both the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation and the Declaration of Independence that look to me like a good effort was made to express certain thoughts clearly, but Sister Mary Grammatica would cross her eyes and perhaps get the vapors had a student turned in the gem we are discussing.
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
I wish I had given these documents more thought sixty years ago and asked her to lay out the grammar diagram just to see the expression on her face.
Arno makes an interesting point, but I notice neither he, nor for that matter, anyone else that I have read of, ever actually accounts for the phrase " .... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ..."
We all simply assume that the author could not possibly have meant what it plainly says. Once the last survivor who was a Citizen, natural or not, living in the late 1780s, passed on to his (Or her ) just reward for having lived good life, there would be no one left eligible to hold the office of POTUS.
I have read that some of the Founders thought that if all went well, there would have to be a new Constitutional Convention in forty or fifty years so that seemingly improbable interpretation could, in theory anyway, have been their intention.
Had that happened, the new authors in perhaps 1850, could have cleaned up the Second Amendment also and defined the meaning of " ...a well regulated Militia ..." for us as well, during what was the last decade of ramrod loaded single shot weaponry thus saving the lives of a forest of trees.
Such a new Constitution would have, no doubt, completely prohibited any form of slavery and when put to ratification, the Southern slave states could well have refused ratification, and thus left the Union legally reducing the likelihood of the carnage that the events of 1861-'65 brought.
But it is not only the Founding Fathers who have given us fits in trying to figure out what writers had in mind. For instance Article II of the Twenty First Amendment has also used reams of paper over it's contradicting, but not specifically over riding, the Interstate Commerce Clause in Article I Section 8.
It seems simple;
" Amendment #21, Section 2;
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. ...."
Not only is it curious in that it is one of only two places where the Constitution limits a specific act of a private citizen, but it flies in the face of;
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
.... No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress....."
Which has been interpreted to mean that no state can make a law that someone could be violating by transporting liquor into its jurisdiction from another state.
Trust me my friends, there have been weighty books written and lengthy debates about this conundrum as well.
It is one of the reasons why when certain people declare emphatically that we should return to the original words and intent of the Constitution that I laugh, as it usually indicates that such people have never sat down and seriously read our wonderful, but often contradictory Constitution.
Hi Charlie,
"Arno makes an interesting point, but I notice neither he, nor for that matter, anyone else that I have read of, ever actually accounts for the phrase " .... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ...""
in the 1700s, commas were as liberally introduced where they have no business being as apostrophes are today, and, in general are best ignored.
David
The pet peeve of Miss Casey (my High School English teacher) was the infamous "comma blunder." She would have delighted in the current conversation!
while commas may not make the world go round, their absence or misuse provide sufficient bumps along the way to make it a messy business.
and, lucky for you, Bobby, that Ms. Casey had only a single peeve; it's a rare thing.
Parse-perfect postage stamp collectors:
It oft has been said, and I oft have read, "It is difficult to write good English and
impossible to write perfect English."
I, a foreigner, will side with Charlie in this discussion: the American Constitution
is not perfect.
John Derry
Addendum - no wonder the profession of law has always been a growth industry in the
English-speaking world.
Long hearty belly laugh !!!
" ... get rid of the comma ..."
and,
[i]" ... (Commas) in general are best ignored...."
Surely you jest.
A pesky little detail like that can significantly change the meaning of a sentence and alter the terms of a contract or will.
I bet Madison and Jefferson would have a different opinion about this.
" .... No person
except a natural born Citizen,
or
a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
But what was written was;
" .... No person
except a natural born Citizen,
(.... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ....)
or
a Citizen of the United States,
at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
And that is a different meaning. It may be that the night was getting on, or the candles were burning low or even that the local brewskis were taking their effect, but dropping the silly little comma presents the possibility that Madison had something else in mind at that moment.
What next, just ignore words or phrases that seem to be extraneous or present an inconvenient principle ?
If you have ever written a contract for the sale of land or a home yourself or drafted a will, you would never countenance suggesting that a comma that creates a different meaning be "just ignored."
Perhaps we could do away with the spaces between the letter of words as well and save paper..
A sentence such as "Heisnowhere" can only mean "He is now here," or could it not mean "He is nowhere.."
Wouldn't that make the Resurrection story quite interesting.
next someone will suggest that a stamp that is perf 10 is the same as perf 10½, because those pesky fractions don't mean very much either.
I've been away from the Stamporama site for a few weeks, so wanted to catch up on the discussions. The topic of damaged stamps and space fillers interests me. But that isn't what's been discussed here for the last two dozen or so posts. While I'm as interested in constitutional minutia as the next guy, I do not believe it belongs in this thread. Just sayin'.
You are right, Ray. Unfortunately, I have no way of moving just some of the posts to a new topic, has to be all or none. So instead I will just request that members get back on topic here and open a new thread in the "Off Topic" area for the "Constitution" and "grammar" discussion (and, BTW, I am guilty of posting irrelevant posts here also).
Bobby Barnhart
Board Moderator
Hi Bobby,
I think you can delete all of the constitutional discussion. We exchanged our points of view and I don't think there is anything of archival quality in here. So, I'd say: clean it up.
Arno
I think its really up to the collector to choose for themselves. I consider a stamp with a tear or pulled or cut perfs to be stamp fillers, but sometimes even if a stamp is fully intact a very heavy cancellation can cause it to be a filler especially older US and GB, those obliterator cancels can be a mother.
" .... BTW, I am guilty of posting irrelevant posts here also ...."
That is because it is such an engrossing subject and one seldom discussed politely, in depth elsewhere.
A damaged stamp is a spacefiller when the person who mounted it keeps the image of the mounted stamp in the back of his/her mind, always looking for the better stamp to replace it (maybe even just a less damaged spacefiller). Hence, even a "graded 90" stamp is a spacefiller when the collector is only waiting to find a "95" to replace it.
Bobby, in that regard, all my stamps are "space fillers"! I always check a new acquisition to what I have in the albums and swap out anything better than what I already have. Looking for 100J for everything!
As it should be, Michael!
I collect some stamps just for the cancel, or a design issue; that would make the stamp unique, or at least uncommon, so its short perfs, pin holes, small tears, heavy hinge markings, off-center alignment, etc. is of secondary interest to me in those cases.
Replacing and upgrading is the precise reason that Scott publishing developed the grading system that we often cuss and discuss. The editors presume that collectors are always on the lookout for better stamps and will pay a premium to get them. It is my belief that a torn or damaged stamp is not collectible unless it is so rare that there is little likelihood of finding an undamaged copy.
Each collector is entitled to collect and display what he or she wants. Charlie likes postally used stamps and if you study the catalogue carefully you will find a number of stamps which are worth more used than mint. The inflation stamps of the Wiemar republic in the 1920's with genuine cancellations, for example. The modern spray on cancellations and marginal performance of today's stamps when they are soaked off of paper make forming an attractive used collection difficult.
A perfectly centered stamp with the design obliterated by a cancellation cannot be considered as very fine any more than an unused stamp with perforations that cut into the design. That said, if you have no other copy at least you can use such stamps to fill a space until you locate a better copy.
Going through an old album I received from someone years ago, I came across a stamp that looked interesting except it had the corner clipped. I guess sometime over past 6 months as I was moving things, I somehow threw it out.
I'm curious as to whether it would have been considered a spacefiller. It was a Scott K2 (4c on 2c US Office in China) used. It was clipped on the bottom left on a diagonal through the number 2.
I never even thought about looking it up in the catalogue because 1) I don't collect US and 2) It was damaged.
What do you guys think?
Kelly
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I like space fillers. I think a descent one (as you described) is worth about 5% of CV. So if CV is $20 or more, it might be worth a dollar to somebody.
K2 catalogs for $60 used and $25 MH. The premium for used would likely apply only to undamaged stamps, so take 5% of $25. I'd say you threw away a stamp worth $1.25, but once you factor in fees and postage, it may not have been worth the trouble to sell. The real problem is verifying that the overprint wasn't a fake. The stamp isn't worth a cert, so that remains an issue. However, it wasn't without ANY value. I take stamps like that and toss them in a box for donation to an organization that gives stamps and supplies to kids to get them interested in collecting. A space filler is better than nothing to some of those kids.
I would prefer a space filler myself in a few cases. For example, I don't have an O69 $5 US State Department Official stamp. CV for MNG is $3750. You might be able to find a poorly centered one with a pulled perf for $1000. I have a card proof in that spot that I paid $10 for. I would pay $100 myself for an O69 with damage similar to your K2. I would be surprised if such an item sold for less than $200 (if it had a cert).
Lars
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Years ago, I put together a chart of how to tell a stamp's condition/grade based on its attributes. It was posted on BidStart. I don't know if it's still there. I'm not sure I still have the file for it as I had a hard drive crash since then. I do have a printed version of it somewhere around here and could scan it.
Tim, or anyone else, could the scan of this document be placed in the exhibits or other appropriate area? Many people found it useful over at BS. I just have to try to find it.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
i also don't mind SFs, either to fill a space or provide a cancel or showcase color ranges or.....
I think Lars' 5% CV is near the high end of what i would consider for something other than pulled perfs or thin on reverse. In these two paragraphs, I'm refering to the stamps alone.
As I'm primarily a cover collector, a stamp's condition there is of less concern. pristine is better, but the stamp itself is often the least important aspect of a cover, which might be, instead, a tied seal, transit markings, auxiliary damage markings, the route, the rate, etc.
David
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
A Damaged British Guinea would be better than no British Guinea.
But heavily cancelled, torn, scraped or otherwise manhandled common stamps are not usually worth the cost of the hinge.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I agree with Charlie to a point and usually round file anything I run across that is torn, clipped, heavily thinned, cut off perfs, etc. etc. Even man-handled, cat & dog handled, and even in my case, wife handled are of no value. But I make a major exception when it comes to anything of great value, like a $5.00 Columbian. I would be an idiot to round file one of those because it had a cut off corner. I do not have one in my collection and gladly pay the 5% of CV to have it, even man-handled, or cat & dog handled, but I won't tell my wife. I would not want it damaged any further. So there is some threshold for Space Fillers and probably there is some different acceptance level for each collector of what the threshold is. I have an idea of what mine is and then throw away anything under that level. Anyone is welcome to pick up my trash if they want to go through it. Could be some real treasures in there. The flies are also free.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I give the space fillers to my two grandsons (3 and 5 years of age). They get to see what stamps are, get to place them in stock books, and no need to worry about their heavy-handedness and the possibility of damaging the stamps. The oldest is proud of his little collection. The youngest is just getting started.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
"Years ago, I put together a chart of how to tell a stamp's condition/grade based on its attributes."
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael,
I would certainly be interested in the chart. Sounds like a great reference tool.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Okay. I'll dig through and try to find it. Hopefully the electronic copy survived the crash, but I'm not too optimistic.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael - you are right, it could be scary if something happened to me. I think she would pile them all up and light the match. I have some PCS Gold Commemorative FDC's that she like's and that keeps me out of trouble most of the time. I think it is really a case of getting attention. Any competition for it is a bad thing. But I muddle through it.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
General rule of thumb: The % of Catalogue Value a damaged stamp brings is usually determened by the CV. The higher the CV, the higher the % the stamp will bring.A 10,000 cv stamp will bring a higher % than a 1,000 one , and so on... There may be some exceptions. It seems that valuable US stamps in low grade, bring a higher %, than do their European counterparts. I believe that is true because European collectors, are less interested in damaged rare stamps, than are US collectors.
I would say that a damaged rare stamp is better than not having the stamp in any condition. As far as less valuable stamps, I think it would be wise, to wait until you can afford a decent looking one. Ted.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Your damaged stamps, if not being kept as space fillers, are always welcome by the Holocaust Stamps Project, which just surpassed the 3 million mark, as of 7/30/13. The website is scheduled to be totally updated in mid-August at which time it will reflect the new total of 3,002,897, more than 25% of the goal of 11 million. Thanks to all who have donated duplicates, common, and damaged stamps already!
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I found the chart. I actually found both versions - the original from 2008, and then the edited one from 2011 with the stamp grades added for reference. I believe I saved them as Word document in web format. Can SOR handle that?
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
To me a spacefiller is in the eye of the beholder. I am particular what is covered on the stamp in cancellation, so spacefiller to me could be a bad cancel. If the stamp has a major thin or tear then to me it is also a spacefiller. If I have an empty space with little or no chance of ever purchasing a copy of a stamp, then spacefiller or not it's collected and is duly noted in the book to replace. Very faded or extremely off color (not listed) could be classified as a spacefiller to me too! Since I believe I'm a tad nit picky I usually would not put a spacefiller in my book, and currently I have none in my collection. Perry
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Turns out I *didn't* throw away the US offices in China K2 used. I just found it. It's still clipped on the bottom corner - go figure! LOL
I don't collect US at all - Scott lists it at $50 - so what's that make it $2 max?
Anyone want it? (Just msg me if you do)
Kelly
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
If you collect China, it would fit in there too.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael - indeed it would - so it's open for grabs for whoever wants it for their US or China as a spacefiller. I still feel bad that the corner got ripped - but it is a nice stamp.
Kelly
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
actually, in my experience at shows and on internet; SF's run 10% of cv. 5% seems to be on the low end, I have a U.S. #144 that has the side sliced off; catalogs for $2000.00, I believe , even 5% of that is $100.00. Spacefillers are pretty much the only way I can
get Hi-v stamps.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Gee, maybe I ought to have put it on auction - may have seen a bidding war! Lol
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
i think that's on the high-end, Carl. I am an admitted bottom feeder, but i think 5% is a good amount to pay for a high-value, difficult-to-get stamp.
I see sound US Scott 73, valued at around $50, often going between $5 and $10. They are not centered well (most aren't), but still sound. A clipped or torn corner, in my view, makes it worthless.
David
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I actually have the bottom piece that ripped off - technically it could be "repaired"
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Some time ago, I read a discussion on condition. A collector should try to improve the quality of his or her collection based on desire and affordability. As Charles pointed out the 1c British Guiana has all four corners clipped, but it is unique. As an aside, the owner is serving life in Pennsylvania for Murder. I am not sure of the status of the stamp.
The assumption of constant improvement is the foundation of the catalog value, which is the benchmark we all use to evaluate our collection. Normally a torn stamp is not collectible except as a space filler, but the collection is yours to form. In breaking down other collections, I am appalled at the poor condition some stamps are in. I think our hobby needs more information about paper preservation techniques.
Les
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I saw the British Guiana #13 at Interphil '76 in Philadelphia. A very nondescript stamp, but a wonder to behold it was never-the-less!
Les, Mr. Dupont died in November 2010 while serving his prison sentence. The estate is being liquidated and there were rumors that the British Guiana #13 was going to go on the auction block. I haven't heard anything else about it for several months now.
Here's some more information.
http://johnapfelbaum.blogspot.com/2010/12/one-cent-british-guiana.html
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
For US stamps, I find that the higher the CV the higher the percentage for a descent "space filler". US Stamps with a CV of $100 can indeed be had for 5% with some flaws, but a stamp with a CV of $1000 is more likely to go for 15 to 20%. Even a major flaw would likely go for 10%.
I have been tracking one US stamp in particular for almost 10 years now with a CV of $3250 to see what range it trades in. The absolute LOWEST price I have seen in all that time is a poorly centered stamp with a pulled perf and a thin that went for almost 30% of CV.
A Back of Book stamp I've been tracking for over 5 years catalogs for $3250 as well and has similar results.
Even these observations are skewed by the grade used for CV. If you were to use the REAL catalog value from the value guide (based on the centering of the stamp) instead of the default (F-VF) in the main catalog listings, you may discover that space fillers go for a lot more than you thought for high CV items.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael,
If you send me the chart I'll post it on the site for you.
Regards ... Tim
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael,
Can you email me a copy as well?
Lars
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Michael, Thank you for doing the research on British Guiana #13. Interesting that the state of Pennsylvania can incarcerate someone for committing a crime and then claim the estate to pay for the incarceration. Actually it sounds like a Bill of Attainder which is prohibited in the Constitution, especially since he was a wannabe traitor.
I always use the Scott Specialized by Grade values for older stamps. I would like to see more articles on preservation and repair. I cannot help but believe that our present and past methods of collecting has damaged many stamps.
I guess the real answer to the original question is: It is a space filler if there is someone who wants the damaged stamp to fill a space.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
The "Bill of Attainder Clause" which has either never or almost never been actually used since the Constitution was written, is intended to prevent laws similar to those often employed in the UK to punish a specific person or family by the King or Queen, usually for some act of treachery and almost always after the fact.
The Pennsylvania reimbursement law or regulation is likely to be applied to all similar criminals who have been convicted of a crime, not a particular person, and is not written after the fact.
Of course since most convicted criminals are for all practical purposes bankrupt to start with there is little reason to move against them unless they have a sudden inheritance or windfall from a book or something.
But thanks, Les, I have been waiting for years to discuss that provision which, I bet not one in a hundred Americans or even members, who are usually better informed that the average bear, have ever noticed it, beyond its mention in the Declaration of Independence as one of the listed complaints against George III.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
"Bill of Attainder" , who would of thunk it?
I’m with Charlie on this as I believed I would never
live long enough to discuss this subject.
Although never used or even attempted, Canada’s
federal government does have the power to
override the nation’s Supreme Court to enact
criminal law with retroactive application.
Attainder exists in Canada’s federal civil law, has
been used, and may be used again and again.
Stamp collectors residing in Canada are at risk,
technically and otherwise, of forfeiting their stamp collection,
in whole or in part, to those ever-grasping hands
of Big Government.
Shows you how small we “little people†really are.
John Derry (too small and bureaucratically beat up to even be considered as a filler)
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Thanks Charlie. Always a pleasure to discuss the Constitution. My argument is that the law punishes the family or heirs by seizing property that was not related to the criminal activity. While it isn't written ex post facto (after the fact) and apparently applies to all persons incarcerated in Pennsylvania, its capricious and selective enforcement acts like a bill of attainder. The property should have been seized when Mr. DuPont was incarcerated and placed in an escrow account to pay for his incarceration with the balance going to the heirs. In effect it is an open ended fine for a crime.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Also note that any criminal act coming under the broad auspices of the RICO (narcotics and racketeering, generally) Act can result in the legal fiction of charging your property with a crime, and upon "conviction" (usually a slam dunk), the seizure for governmental uses or sale at auction with the money going into law enforcement coffers.
So do not peddle drugs, launder money, cross state lines for multifarious bad acts unless you leave your stamps some place else.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
" .... While it isn't written ex post facto (after the fact) and apparently applies to all persons incarcerated in Pennsylvania, it's capricious and selective enforcement acts like a bill of attainder. ...."
I agree completely about the Capricious and Selective nature of such law, rule or regulation.
I just love meeting someone who knows what a "Bill of Attainder" is.
Next on my rhetorical bucket list, I want to find someone who can explain what a "Natural born" citizen is.
perhaps by explaining what an un-natural born citizen is ?
When I read the Constitution, or other traditional writings, I see the truth in the trite saying;
" .... You may think you understood what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you think you heard is not what I thought I meant. ...."
I am sure Tom Jefferson would agree.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Charlie, I think the framers meant to say "native born" . I do not recall reading any discussions about the phrase. I suppose they were concerned about loyalty of future President.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
In the few places where it is discussed it is explained as a way to prevent any member of the established ruling aristocracy of Britain or France from becoming the chief executive of the fledgling nation.
They feared Kings and Emperors.
It was a part of their desire to put out the "Not Welcome" sign to Dukes, Counts or Princes looking for a new fiefdom that is also reflected in Article One, Section 9, Clause 8,the clause that prohibits royal titles of nobility, (Federal) and Article One, Section 10, Clause 1 that prohibits States from creating such titles. There is also a prohibition of receiving gifts or awards from foreign nations without specific permission from Congress.
So, if some general or statesman is offered an award such as the "Victoria Cross" or "Croix d'Guerre" they need a resolution from our Congress. The Founding Fathers were very fussy about such things.
If a veteran fought in Viet Nam for six months or was wounded or killed, the (then) government of Viet Nam awarded the Vietnam Campaign Medal and that was approved by Congress.
I agree that had they written "Native Born" instead it would have been just as effective and eliminated any discussion as to whether a person born elsewhere even to an American citizen might attain the presidency.
That discussion will be significant were Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada (Not Kenya) to seek the office and should that develop you can bet it will reach the USSC for a binding decision.
His birth mother was/is (?) a US citizen but his father is/was a Cuban.
Is he a "Natural Born" citizen ?
Was a news of his birth sent by secret Western Union telegram from Havana to Canada so that his parents could insert a notice in the Calgary newspapers at the right date and a birth notice filed with the Alberta Clerk's Offices so that if he ever got the chance he could run for president ?
Maybe they should have chosen Honolulu for the bogus birth certificate ?
That does sound rather far fetched, doesn't it, but there are people who will believe such nonsense under certain circumstances.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
This is way off topic, but fun.
While I do not subscribe to the claim that President Obama was born in Kenya, he still would have been a citizen because his Mother was a citizen. Just as Ted Cruz is a eligible despite his birth in Canada. If she had registered President Obama with the US embassy in Kenya then there would have been a record of his birth in Kenya. She did not but he did re-enter the United States from Indonesia. There must have been a passport issued to her/or him for them to go to Indonesia and return. After all, John McCain was born in Panama (Canal Zone)which is not native born but a natural born citizen via his parents.
I do kind of wish that the issue had been taken up and settled by the US Supreme Court, but given what they did in Bush vs Gore in 2000, I really do not know how they would have ruled. What about a C-Section or an in-vitro fertilization or anonymous sperm donor, are those natural births? And there is the other issue that paternity can be disputed but maternity is certainly known.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
".... This is way off topic, but fun. ..."
Yse, fun for people who enjoy delving into the more obscure and often unfathomable clauses of our beloved Constitution and who will often take an opposing view just to promote the conversation.
The problem with this clause is several fold.
The first problem is that other than preventing the Marquis de Layfayette, the "so-called" Count Kasimir Pulaski or Baron von Steuben perhaps for snarky reasons buried in the dustbin of history, no one actually knows what "Natural Born" really meant to Jefferson as he penned the lines.
Perhaps it referred only to people who were vaginally born ?
No C-section babies need apply ?
Now it may have meant citizens born outside the legal confines of the United States were not to be considered "natural born" regardless of the citizenship of their parents and that is why in 1790 a law was passed and later amended that declared that children " .... hereafter born outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.... " would be considered US Citizens which implies that the Constitution's writers considered such children not to be US citizens without the added law and its amendment.
If that is applied loosely there are a lot of Filipinos who can claim US citizenship if they or their parents were born while the Philippine islands were under US jurisdiction.
There were a series of Insular Decisions about 100 years ago that seemed to declare that the Constitution follows the flag, but only partly.
Talk about confusion.
Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines were only partly subject to or protected by the words of the Constitution.
That then brings up the question of whether a member of one of the Native American tribes, born on an independent reservation is, or is not, a natural born Native American.
What a can or worms this wording and subsequent legislation creates.
The Panama Canal Zone seems to have been outside the limits of these united states, but not quite outside the jurisdiction before 1980 when the canal was returned to the Panamanians to play with.
What would be ironic and perhaps a great show would be watching the so-called Strict Constructionists justices of the USSC struggling with a literal interpretation of the Constitution looking for the exact words that would allow a similar minded presidential candidate take office if he were born in Calgary or Yellowknife of an American citizen mother and a displaced Cuban refugee father.
The John Stewart Shows that week will be a hoot.
And if we ever get that phrase figured out we can turn our attention to the part that says, "... at the time of the adoption of this Constitution..."
Is there anyone, not a vampire, alive today who was a natural born citizen in 1790 ?
Or even a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
The word "natural" is simply redundant and means nothing. It meant nothing then, and means nothing now. I am sure if the founding father would have to witness all the BS that is read into that little word these days, they would get a good laugh out of us. In addition, the paragraph has a comma in the wrong place, and with few adjustments and improved grammar the paragraph reads in its most obvious meaning:
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
So how hard is that? (Even got to use the new strike through format.) Of course, a proposed constitutional amendment to clean up these clerical errors in the wording, would have no chance in this political environment. Instead, rather put our energy in trying to find meaning and intent where there clearly is none.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
@Rhinelander, Not true! I'm confident that Jefferson foresaw (as did Jules Verne) that one day in the future there would be "Test-Tube" babies. So he knew what he meant when he penned "Natural Born."
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
On what do you base your confidence, "tuscany4me"?
John Derry
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
If you are born in the US or naturalized you are a citizen, but if the former, not necessarily natural born.
If you are born in the US to parents that are citizens you are natural born citizen.
If born in US to aliens you are a citizen but not natural born.
If born outside US to parents that are citizens, that is debatable in my opinion. You are definitely citizen, but not necessarily natural born (as some argue).
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
And of course only if NOT owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I remember the good nuns at both grammar school and high school stressing that it was important to be able to diagram sentences to determine their clarity and meaning.
There are several sentences or clauses in both the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation and the Declaration of Independence that look to me like a good effort was made to express certain thoughts clearly, but Sister Mary Grammatica would cross her eyes and perhaps get the vapors had a student turned in the gem we are discussing.
" .... No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
I wish I had given these documents more thought sixty years ago and asked her to lay out the grammar diagram just to see the expression on her face.
Arno makes an interesting point, but I notice neither he, nor for that matter, anyone else that I have read of, ever actually accounts for the phrase " .... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ..."
We all simply assume that the author could not possibly have meant what it plainly says. Once the last survivor who was a Citizen, natural or not, living in the late 1780s, passed on to his (Or her ) just reward for having lived good life, there would be no one left eligible to hold the office of POTUS.
I have read that some of the Founders thought that if all went well, there would have to be a new Constitutional Convention in forty or fifty years so that seemingly improbable interpretation could, in theory anyway, have been their intention.
Had that happened, the new authors in perhaps 1850, could have cleaned up the Second Amendment also and defined the meaning of " ...a well regulated Militia ..." for us as well, during what was the last decade of ramrod loaded single shot weaponry thus saving the lives of a forest of trees.
Such a new Constitution would have, no doubt, completely prohibited any form of slavery and when put to ratification, the Southern slave states could well have refused ratification, and thus left the Union legally reducing the likelihood of the carnage that the events of 1861-'65 brought.
But it is not only the Founding Fathers who have given us fits in trying to figure out what writers had in mind. For instance Article II of the Twenty First Amendment has also used reams of paper over it's contradicting, but not specifically over riding, the Interstate Commerce Clause in Article I Section 8.
It seems simple;
" Amendment #21, Section 2;
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. ...."
Not only is it curious in that it is one of only two places where the Constitution limits a specific act of a private citizen, but it flies in the face of;
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
.... No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress....."
Which has been interpreted to mean that no state can make a law that someone could be violating by transporting liquor into its jurisdiction from another state.
Trust me my friends, there have been weighty books written and lengthy debates about this conundrum as well.
It is one of the reasons why when certain people declare emphatically that we should return to the original words and intent of the Constitution that I laugh, as it usually indicates that such people have never sat down and seriously read our wonderful, but often contradictory Constitution.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Hi Charlie,
"Arno makes an interesting point, but I notice neither he, nor for that matter, anyone else that I have read of, ever actually accounts for the phrase " .... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ...""
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
in the 1700s, commas were as liberally introduced where they have no business being as apostrophes are today, and, in general are best ignored.
David
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
The pet peeve of Miss Casey (my High School English teacher) was the infamous "comma blunder." She would have delighted in the current conversation!
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
while commas may not make the world go round, their absence or misuse provide sufficient bumps along the way to make it a messy business.
and, lucky for you, Bobby, that Ms. Casey had only a single peeve; it's a rare thing.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Parse-perfect postage stamp collectors:
It oft has been said, and I oft have read, "It is difficult to write good English and
impossible to write perfect English."
I, a foreigner, will side with Charlie in this discussion: the American Constitution
is not perfect.
John Derry
Addendum - no wonder the profession of law has always been a growth industry in the
English-speaking world.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Long hearty belly laugh !!!
" ... get rid of the comma ..."
and,
[i]" ... (Commas) in general are best ignored...."
Surely you jest.
A pesky little detail like that can significantly change the meaning of a sentence and alter the terms of a contract or will.
I bet Madison and Jefferson would have a different opinion about this.
" .... No person
except a natural born Citizen,
or
a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
But what was written was;
" .... No person
except a natural born Citizen,
(.... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ....)
or
a Citizen of the United States,
at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
shall be eligible to the Office of President; ...."
And that is a different meaning. It may be that the night was getting on, or the candles were burning low or even that the local brewskis were taking their effect, but dropping the silly little comma presents the possibility that Madison had something else in mind at that moment.
What next, just ignore words or phrases that seem to be extraneous or present an inconvenient principle ?
If you have ever written a contract for the sale of land or a home yourself or drafted a will, you would never countenance suggesting that a comma that creates a different meaning be "just ignored."
Perhaps we could do away with the spaces between the letter of words as well and save paper..
A sentence such as "Heisnowhere" can only mean "He is now here," or could it not mean "He is nowhere.."
Wouldn't that make the Resurrection story quite interesting.
next someone will suggest that a stamp that is perf 10 is the same as perf 10½, because those pesky fractions don't mean very much either.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I've been away from the Stamporama site for a few weeks, so wanted to catch up on the discussions. The topic of damaged stamps and space fillers interests me. But that isn't what's been discussed here for the last two dozen or so posts. While I'm as interested in constitutional minutia as the next guy, I do not believe it belongs in this thread. Just sayin'.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
You are right, Ray. Unfortunately, I have no way of moving just some of the posts to a new topic, has to be all or none. So instead I will just request that members get back on topic here and open a new thread in the "Off Topic" area for the "Constitution" and "grammar" discussion (and, BTW, I am guilty of posting irrelevant posts here also).
Bobby Barnhart
Board Moderator
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Hi Bobby,
I think you can delete all of the constitutional discussion. We exchanged our points of view and I don't think there is anything of archival quality in here. So, I'd say: clean it up.
Arno
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I think its really up to the collector to choose for themselves. I consider a stamp with a tear or pulled or cut perfs to be stamp fillers, but sometimes even if a stamp is fully intact a very heavy cancellation can cause it to be a filler especially older US and GB, those obliterator cancels can be a mother.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
" .... BTW, I am guilty of posting irrelevant posts here also ...."
That is because it is such an engrossing subject and one seldom discussed politely, in depth elsewhere.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
A damaged stamp is a spacefiller when the person who mounted it keeps the image of the mounted stamp in the back of his/her mind, always looking for the better stamp to replace it (maybe even just a less damaged spacefiller). Hence, even a "graded 90" stamp is a spacefiller when the collector is only waiting to find a "95" to replace it.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Bobby, in that regard, all my stamps are "space fillers"! I always check a new acquisition to what I have in the albums and swap out anything better than what I already have. Looking for 100J for everything!
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
As it should be, Michael!
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
I collect some stamps just for the cancel, or a design issue; that would make the stamp unique, or at least uncommon, so its short perfs, pin holes, small tears, heavy hinge markings, off-center alignment, etc. is of secondary interest to me in those cases.
re: Damaged Stamps - when are they considered spacefillers?
Replacing and upgrading is the precise reason that Scott publishing developed the grading system that we often cuss and discuss. The editors presume that collectors are always on the lookout for better stamps and will pay a premium to get them. It is my belief that a torn or damaged stamp is not collectible unless it is so rare that there is little likelihood of finding an undamaged copy.
Each collector is entitled to collect and display what he or she wants. Charlie likes postally used stamps and if you study the catalogue carefully you will find a number of stamps which are worth more used than mint. The inflation stamps of the Wiemar republic in the 1920's with genuine cancellations, for example. The modern spray on cancellations and marginal performance of today's stamps when they are soaked off of paper make forming an attractive used collection difficult.
A perfectly centered stamp with the design obliterated by a cancellation cannot be considered as very fine any more than an unused stamp with perforations that cut into the design. That said, if you have no other copy at least you can use such stamps to fill a space until you locate a better copy.