... to make myself clear again!

Let me restate my point this way:

I don't rely on a representation that a chip is obsolete, unless it is being made by someone who is known to me to be a reliable source of such a representation. I hesitate to mention specific names for fear that I will omit someone who should be on the list and thereby either hurt that person's feelings or cause some unknowledgeable reader to conclude that the omitted person is not reliable. So, I'll just use the generic term "Expert Chipper".

If "Expert Chipper" calls a chip "obsolete", I accept that representation at face value. For anyone who is not an "Expert Chipper", I place no value on the representation at all and protect myself accordingly (e.g., by doing the research myself, by checking with someone who is an "Expert Chipper" or by passing on the chip).

>> If we can't agree on a reasonable, useful definition of the
>> term obsolete, how can we ever claim someone is misusing it?

Difficult, but not always impossible. There will be situations where the misrepresentation is so blatant that no reasonable understanding of "obsolete" could ever apply (e.g., where the chip is still in current use at the casino). Then, if the person making this representation is a club member, I think he or she would be subject to club discipline.

BTW, I have no problem concluding that a representation that the Harrah's $1 brass core is "obsolete at Harrah's Tahoe" is fraudulently misleading if the person making that representation knows it is still in use at Harrah's Reno (because of the unusual circumstance that the same chips are used at both).

I also agree that this subject is one on which the club can and should make a stand.

----- jim o\-S