>>Who are "THEY" to whom you refer?

Anyone who may consider this sort of arrangement in the future.

>>Because Peter Sanders does not agree with it ... does not make it any less worthy a fund raising effort for a worthwhile project.

It has nothing to do with whether I agree. IT IS A BAD IDEA ON ITS ON MERITS. I'm merely pointing that out for those you may have overlooked it.

>>Let those who support our project rally around our efforts through their participation, and those non-believers can ignore us and throw brickbats instead of bouquets.

You should know that this is an unacceptable attitude. After all you are making the same arguments that those who supported slabbing made. I say that this particular arrangement negatively impacts the whole hobby whether I buy the chip or not because it promotes the manipulation of the marketplace.

>>but what useful purpose does it serve to "dis" it?

The useful purpose in my making these posts is hopefully convince those who might be involved in similar projects in the future from doing so. The same way that my anti-slabbing posts were aimed at discouraging people from participating in that practice.

Now its my turn to ask a couple of questions:

Why is it that you think those of us who have an opinion different than yours should not voice it?

Why is it that you seem so determined to try to suggest that those of us who object to this particular method of raising money are not supportive of the building fund or the club?