Hello folks ... I was wondering if anyone can see why this item of
mail was rejected and if it is because of the From: in the mail body,
why should Listserv reject it if it has the > in front of it? Does it
help to have Listserv (this requires some opinion here) reject such mail
items - i.e. are there any legitimate reasons for that to be the case?
Or, did I miss some other obvious problem?
Thanks,
/Geert
*** Start ***
Received: from CUNYVM by CUNYVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 6606; Thu,
15 Oct 92 12:14:03 EDT
Received: from PCCVM.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 1494; Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:13:59 EDT
Received: from PCCVM.BITNET by PCCVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 8274;
Thu, 15 Oct 92 09:09:33 PDT
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:09:33 -0700
From: Revised List Processor (1.7d)
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject: STAMPS: error report from SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG
To: "Geert K. Marien" <[log in to unmask]>
X-LSV-ListID: None
The enclosed mail file, found in the STAMPS reader and shown under the spoolid
8263 in the console log, has been identified as a possible delivery error
notice for the following reason: "Sender:", "From:" or "Reply-To:" field
pointing to the list has been found in mail body.
------------------------- Message in error (88 lines) -------------------------
Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by PCCVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id
8262; Thu, 15 Oct 92 09:08:17 PDT
Received: from PUCC by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (Mailer R2.08 ptf043) with BSMTP id
6037; Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:11:14 EDT
Received: from SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG by pucc.PRINCETON.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with TCP; Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:11:12 EDT
Received: by shrsys.hslc.org (MX V3.1) id 246; Thu, 15 Oct 1992 12:09:33 EDT
Sender: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 12:09:31 EDT
From: Alan Simon <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: Question to Usa Collectors
> From: MX%"[log in to unmask]" 15-OCT-1992 11:25:15.85
> Subj: Question to Usa Collectors
> Among some of the older stamps, ie the columbian series, I have several
> stamps with missing perforations at the top. They where not cut off, and it
> looks like the stamps come from a booklet.. (1893!!). Are they, by any chance,
> stamps from the top of the sheet, and if so, why don't I have any stamps
> which are cut at the left or right.
> If I am correct, why aren't they listed as two different stamps. Logically,
> the stamps from the top or bottom of sheets are harder to find that stamps
> with perforations on all four sides.
>
> How are such stamps generally collected in the states? Last, but not least,
> the cut stamps are not only from the columbian series.
>
> Francesco
Francesco -
What you have are called straight-edge stamps, and are usually treated as being
less desirable than the same stamps with perforations on all sides. You are
correct in your logical statement that they are harder to find becuase there
are fewer of them. However, if they had a higher catalog value than the full
perforated stamps, what would stop an unscrupulous dealer or collector from
cutting off the perforations from one side?
Most US stamps have been printed in large sheets, which were then cut into
panes to form what most collectors call sheets. Most of the modern stamps were
printed in one sheet of four panes, with plate numbers at each corner. It is
possible to collect matched sets of these plate numbers, and a number of
collectors do so.
Older stamps were printed in sheets of four panes in a square, or two panes
either horizontally or vertically. These panes were separated by a line of
color, to help the operator of the cutting machine precisely split the panes.
However, the cut was not always exact, showing a clear line on on of the
stamps. I collect straight edge stamps showing these lines, and I am able to
recreate a mini sheet of stamps printed in four panes, like this:
______ _______ ______
| c 3 c 3 |
| c 3 c 3 |
|nnnnnc 3nnnnnc 3nnnnn|
|uuuuuc 3uuuuuc 3uuuuu|
| c 3 c 3 |
| c 3 c 3 |
|nnnnnc 3nnnnnc 3nnnnn|
|uuuuuc 3uuuuuc 3uuuuu|
| c 3 c 3 |
| c 3 c 3 |
______ _______ ______
However, many of the stamp sheets had no perforations around the entire sheet.
Your Columbian stamp may come from the top row of the bottom pane, missing the
line between the two panes, or it may come from the top row of the top pane,
which never had a line.
Finally, the reason that they do not have a different catalog number is they
come from the same issed sheet as the fully perforated stamps, whereas booklet
stamps come from a pane issued in a different format.
I hope this helps.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Simon [log in to unmask]
Associate Director [log in to unmask]
Health Sciences Libraries Consortium VOICE: (215) 222-1532
3600 Market Street, Suite 550 FAX: (215) 222-0416
Philadelphia, PA 19104
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** END **
|
