... yes men (Neal Silverman and Marty Kaplan)".

I have been off the board for two days while travelling to Syracuse Tuesday and visiting with family Wednesday. Came on early this morning (Thursday about 2:00 am Eastern time) to find hundreds of new messages, many of them on the issue of slabbing. It took me more than 2 and a half hours to read them all (and I was unable to access the club board, so don't know if there are more there as well).

I have stated and restated my position on the issue of slabbing and feel no need to repeat it here again in any detail. I do, however, feel compelled to respond to the following comments in the post by Steve Wells:

>> However, unless I woke up in Cuba today, I don't need or want Jim Reilly and his handpicked band of yes men (Neal Silverman and Marty Kaplan) telling me what economic decisions I am allowed to make. <<

One of the major differences between our country and places like Cuba, Steve, is that here private people and organizations get to make their own rules. Our club is a private organization, free to make its own rules, for the most part, without government interference. Furthermore, our club is a democracy; if a majority of members disagree with what I have to say, I won't get elected. Simple as that.

As for my "handpicked band of yes men", perhaps you should know at least some of the facts involved in their candidacy before making such insulting and derogatory comments. If you were paying attention, you know that Neal announced his run for Vice President before I announced that I would be running for president (though he did know, from private email, that I considering running). He DID NOT consult with me before making his own announcement regarding the vice president's position. I was surprised (albeit pleasantly so) when he announced that he was running.

Marty announced his candidacy after I announced mine. He also DID NOT consult with me regarding his decision. I was even more surprised by Marty's announcement than I had been by Neal's (though no less pleased by it). I did not ask either of them to run.

On the specific issue of slabbing, I DID NOT consult with either of them before announcing my position. Privately, I have advised Neal, Marty and Ralph Myers that I do not expect them to agree with every position statement I make and that if they happen to disagree, I expect them to say so (and, if it comes to that, to vote so).

BTW, the policy difference alluded to by Bob Orme was also the subject of a heated debate on the bulletin boards -- the question of whether chapter members should be required to be members of the international club. I proposed a compromise which would allow people to remain members of chapters without individually joining the parent club. Neal and Marty were rather vocal in publicly opposing my position and supporting those who would require all chapter members to be members of the international. This discussion occurred AFTER we were announced candidates for club offices.

Furthermore, if you were paying attention you also know that the proposal to prohibit slabbed chips at the convention and in the club auction was originally made by Jim Episale (obviously not one of my "handpicked band of yes men"). I picked up on his proposal, someone else as I recall suggested adding the club magazine, and I eventually came down in support of all three restrictions. Neal originally was not in support, but was convinced by the ongoing discussion. Marty announced his position only in the last few days after, as is his wont, having carefully considered and analyzed all of the considerations.

Not once in our private exchanges of email regarding the election campaign have I ever even suggested what their position should be or even asked them to support my public position.

You have seriously denigrated the character and integrity of two very fine members of the chip collecting community. I think you owe Neal and Marty an apology.

None of us is trying to tell you "what economic decisions" you are "allowed to make". I have said several times, slab chips if you like; buy or sell slabbed chips if you like. Support slabbing or not as you see fit. Just not on the club convention floor, not in the club auction, not in the club magazine.

>> I prefer to use my own brain and make my own decisions. <<

I think I said almost exactly the same thing about the grading and slabbing of chips by a supposedly neutral, supposedly expert third party.

>> Jim correctly assumed that he could shore up a base of support by coming out against slabbing. I was amused at his contention that he was "taking a chance" by coming out so strongly and quickly. Give me a break, Jim. After two solid years of vitriol on this board against grading systems and slabbing by so many people, Nostradamus was not required to predict the outcome! <<

If you're going to "quote" me, Steve, at least do so accurately. What I said, in response to David Moore's suggestion that my position was "politically astute", was:

"If the scenario you describe plays out, it will be more like dumb luck than political astuteness. Don't forget, I announced my position on this before either Nate or Jim S. I had no idea what they would say. Or what the feeling among other club members would be. For all I knew, I could just as easily have been sounding the death knell of my own 'political' aspirations."

I would hardly have been "shoring up" a "base of support" if both Nate and Jim S. had agreed with me. Essentially, that would have left us all status quo. And, as I said above, I was adopting a position initially advanced by Jim Episale, who is running AGAINST one of my TEAMWORK endorsers and endorsements, Marty Kaplan.

Perhaps you saw the inevitability of the negative response. I did not. Although there has been some vocal opposition to detailed grading, I don't think slabbing was mentioned all that often prior to the last two weeks. Even NOW, as some such as John Benedict have pointed out, we do not have a good idea what 90% of the club membership thinks on this issue.

In any event, I don't give a damn about the political consequences of my stand. I have said publicly here (and privately to a few people by email), that if you consider this a "deal-breaker" issue and disagree with me, vote for one of the other candidates. I disagree with their stance on this issue; nevertheless, I still respect both as individuals, as collectors and as candidates. Either will make a fine president. Everyone should vote for whichever candidate they feel will best represent their interests over the next two years.

>> That gave us ... Prohibition in 1919 (the best
>> argument against banning anything!) ... <<

This comment is utter nonsense in the context of our discussion of slabbed chips. Perhaps it would make sense if we WERE trying to BAN slabbed chips entirely. Let me ask you this, can ANYONE sell ANY TYPE OF ALCOHOL to ANYONE at ANY TIME and ANY PLACE he or she desires? Or, even after the repeal of prohibition, are there still some governmental restrictions on when, where, how, by whom and to whom alcohol can be sold? The answer should be patently obvious. There are literally thousands of laws in this country restricting the sale of alcohol, including such obvious ones as licensing/permit requirements on WHO can sell it, use and zoning laws as to WHERE, WHEN and HOW it can be sold, and serious limitations on TO WHOM it can be sold, including EVERYONE under the age of 21. Many of these restrictions carry CRIMINAL, as well as civil, penalties for violation.

>> Jim Reilly claims to be a Libertarian, but that is ludicrous. ... No real Libertarian would ever propose solving a problem by restricting individual freedom. That is the exact opposite of what the Libertarian philosophy is all about. <<

Initially, as I said in my first response to Peter Sanders' inquiry whether I supported the Episale proposal, I expressed some reservations about prohibiting slabbed chips on the convention floor. Ultimately, I realized that this is neither a "freedom" nor a "Libertarian" issue. We are a private organization. NOTHING we do can ever constitute a "restriction on individual freedom" in the sense with which Libertarianism is concerned. If any government agency was proposing to restrict the sale of slabbed chips on our convention floor, in our auction or through our magazine, I'd be #1 on the list of people telling the government to get the hell out of our business.

And, as I have said before and Archie has achingly tried to remind everyone, the prohibition proposed by Jim Episale, which I have endorsed and the current board apparently is or will be considering, would not restrict your "freedom" to slab chips or to buy or sell slabbed chips. You will be "free" to do so 365 days of the year over 99.9999+ % of the globe, 361 days of the year over 100% of the globe and 365 days of the year in 99.9999+ % of all possible advertising venues. Just not on our convention floor, not in our club auction and not through our club magazine. By the FREE CHOICE of democratically elected representatives, chosen after they have made their intentions and expectations clear.

NOT IN MY HOBBY. NOT ON MY WATCH. NOT WITHOUT A FIGHT. ----- jim o\-S