I'm not really sure what your objection here is.

In regard to your class 1 chips:

If your objection is that putting these chips freely into the marketplace reduces the price of these chips, that is not a fair objection. If the price of chips (as most commodities) is a factor of the forces of supply and demand than anytime a more of a specific chip is placed into market the price will be affected as supply is affected. To suggest that chips should not be placed into the market place because the increase in supply will reduce the price is in fact bad for the hobby. The hobby benefits by collectors being able to get the chips they covet. It may be bad for investors, but it is good for collectors. I am curious as to how you will reconcile your position in this regard with your position on the third evil in your series, grabbing.

As for your class 2 chips:

The fact that the ready availability of common chips means that these chips can be obtained on ebay for a small price is not bad for the hobby. Would you rather have novice collectors pay exorbitant premiums for common chips? Remember not all collectors have ready access to these chips. I do not think that this creates a "bad impression." If Ebay was reserved only for the more expensive chips this would create the bad impression that collecting these common chips is illegitimate.

And as to your class 3 chips:

Your objection seems to be that Ebay is driving down prices by making the availability of certain chips more apparent. You seem to suggest that it would be better if buyers were willing to pay more a chip. Why is it bad?

Your thesis seems to be based on the belief that chips have an inherent monetary value and that Ebay causes them to be traded below that value. I believe that chips have no inherent monetary value. The monetary value is set by the market place. Ebay is not the entire market place, but it is a legitimate part of the marketplace.