Proposed New System for Insert Notes

News: Welcome to the Canadian Paper Money Forum.

Quote:
Perhaps we could start to formalize the Insert determination process by writng a comprensive column under the Important Topics or Refernce category titled How Insert ranges are determined.
 
 
I think this is a great idea!  It would be the best thing that could come out of this thread..

I agree 100%

Before someone drives himself crazy, let me point out the simplest thing: the where,consensus and conclusion is the state and direction of the discussion, in other word, have we decided to do something or nothing.  It would be sad if we could not even decide to agree to disagree.  
One common characteristic of many posters is some tend not to read the posts they respond to or simply seize on a word or phrase to post their own opinions.   Anyone that has  followed the discussion would realize quite quickly that no one has suggested bypassing Giles' lists and efforts, rather, the idea has been to complement or assist to make his lists more complete and accurate.   Someone has sorted of suggested creating and maintaining a list then would periodically compare the lists to see if both lists come to the same conclusion, i.e. identical ranges.  If there are discrepancies, we would try to find out which ranges are accurate.
 It is sad to hear that the opinion that brickers WOULD NOT want to share the information.  The fact is most them are contributing to Giles' list.  If the unwillingness to share is true, maybe Paul should close down the site because it would be meaningless to continue since the main purpose of the site is to share.

[size=14]It is time to make a decision then.[/size]

1) I Support a Separate Area on the Forums for "New Insert Discovery's" so individuals can share information and pertinant information will be relayed to Gilles through the New Candidate.

2) This New Area should have a locked Sticky with DETAILED information (Both Technical and Laymans) on WHAT Inserts are, how Inserts are found, the concept behind the placement of Inserts, the proper process of submitting the information and the "Flow Charts" of how their information will be relayed and used. People submitting information should get a response back confirming that the information was recieved. This should be wide open so EVERYONE knows what is going on.

3) I Think We Need an Individual to Support Gilles efforts by providing faster information PRIOR to GP List. Then  GP List Will Confirm (As Information will be shared between both). So comparing both Lists. The New list MIGHT include current trend values (A Vote on this would be a good idea)

4) I Think the Individual should NOT be a Brick Searcher or involved in the sale of Inserts. We should also have this individual create their own style of newsletter and through feedback refine the design over time.

5) I Agree The High/Low List should ONLY have Confirmed Inserts (Both Individuals agree it is legitimate). This information will also be submitted for Charlton.

We need Yes/No Decisions to these questions if we are going to proceed. No More Sitting on the Fence.

[size=14]***Again I am requesting this thread be Properly Re-Named To Draw More People Into the Decision Making***[/size]

3) I Think We Need an Individual to Support Gilles efforts by providing faster information PRIOR to GP List. Then  GP List Will Confirm (As Information will be shared between both). So comparing both Lists. The New list MIGHT include current trend values (A Vote on this would be a good idea)

4) I Think the Individual should NOT be a Brick Searcher or involved in the sale of Inserts. We should also have this individual create their own style of newsletter and through feedback refine the design over time.

I would like to disagree with point 3 in that it undermines the authoritativeness of Gilles' printed lists by confirming verbal or other information.

Finally, point 4, in suggesting that this new individual issue their own list, suggests competition with Gilles as being the authoritative voice on inserts. See my previous post for my thoughts in that regard.

Ok, Lets get some more ideas flowing and make more progress. We had to layout ideas to start from...

So, What is the Proposed amendment to point 3 and 4? We need to keep making progress, not just "I Disagree". If something does not seem correct please post a proposed amendment to the point.

This way we will start making definitive progress. It will become a blend of everyone's input to refine exactly what we are looking for.

Thank you!  

I am very excited that you brought this up. I have addressed this. Just adding some finishing touches.
Will be "published" shortly.

Thank you Hudson!!  I am sure this will go a long way in unravelling the mystery surrounding inserts for me and many other new members.  I look forward to reading this!

Brad

So, Are we any closer to making any decisions?

We need more input by members. Any Members, please feel free to put in your 2 Cents on what YOU would like to see and/or if you support any of the ideas put forward.

I hope that what we will eventually do is to answer Standeasy's question. Whereas some of us would know where to look and where to find relevant information to draw our own conclusions around Suspected ranges bantered around in the forum, new members may have ready access to the same may not have that same assurance because they don't know how the process works. Hence establishing a educational category How Insert ranges are determined. At least document the current process if everyone is okay with the setup as is. Maybe add a FAQ section.

How do we (I) keep up with what seems to be a never ending flow of new and claimed new insert notes.  I,m going batty trying to do so.  I go thru our favorite auction site.  I receive regular listings from a couple of excellent dealers  but every time I turn around there are a few more  notes for me to add to my list of confirmed or possible inserts. Do we have a segment on the CPMF that covers all my puzzlement.

One point is that terminology needs to be clear. I've seen plenty of stuff on the auction site that don't fit the terminology used therefore it is not the ideal site to learn the lexicon let alone learning to grade. There were Radars that are not radars, Ladders that are not ladders, near inserts well, are really not inserts. We should provide precise terminology as possible because the newer members need that. Education is part of the mission statement of this site isn't it?

Second point how could we make data passed on to Gilles any more efficient other that buying him a computer and hooking him up to the internet. I don't exactly know how this works but I'm sure that the more information we could provide, the sooner he could come to a firm conclusion. So this means I'll really have to get involved in brick researching and I already got bad eyesight.

My third point is does Gilles have some protege that works with him? I starting to wonder on the way home from work that if something happened to him, would we be collectively hung 'by the petard'. Brent said... he is how old? "Gilles has been doing this stuff since before I was born. " Guess I have been working with too many old people lately.  


Forth, I nominate BC for the first national symposium on Canadian journey series insert notes to be here. At least we expect one day of rain this week Sunday. Be sure to bring your collections for the show-and-tell segment.    

PD

I hope that what we will eventually do is to answer Standeasy's question. Whereas some of us would know where to look and where to find relevant information to draw our own conclusions around Suspected ranges bantered around in the forum, new members may have ready access to the same may not have that same assurance because they don't know how the process works. Hence establishing a educational category How Insert ranges are determined. At least document the current process if everyone is okay with the setup as is. Maybe add a FAQ section.[/qoute]

Oh boy, I can hardly wait to get this article out!!    

I agree with PD totally:
Terminology must be very precise and clear.
We have worked through QCIN's (Quality Control Inspection Notes) with success, and we will work through this with success.  

I've seen plenty of stuff on the auction site that don't fit the terminology used therefore it is not the ideal site to learn the lexicon let alone learning to grade.

I couln't agree more.  The auction site is not the education site, it is the sales site.

Second point how could we make data passed on to Gilles any more efficient other that buying him a computer and hooking him up to the internet. I don't exactly know how this works but I'm sure that the more information we could provide, the sooner he could come to a firm conclusion.

As far as I know, this is being done by the intermediary who we know as sudzee.  Sudzee please correct me if I am wrong.  But this is why all brick information needs to go to him.  Full in accurate in all detail, with FP/BP included.

My third point is does Gilles have some protege that works with him? I starting to wonder on the way home from work that if something happened to him, would we be collectively hung 'by the petard'. Brent said... he is how old? "Gilles has been doing this stuff since before I was born. " Guess I have been working with too many old people lately.  

Yes this is an important issue, and I think the best thing about this thread is that this possibility/inevitablility has been brought up.
As Brent mentioned in reply #18, I think this criteria is an excellent base to start from.

Can someone else do a better job? I don't know. What about a cooperative effort? Certainly a possibility. I have a few ideas of my own about how such an endeavour should operate, and those ideas all have to do with being trustworthy, reputable, unquestionable and having integrity:

The operation should be run by one person, with a small board of 2-3 advisors who can monitor the work to maintain accountability and transparency.

These individuals should avoid conflicts of interest, namely they should not be involved in the direct sale of insert notes.

These individuals should be respected and trusted within the community.

Only confirmed insert ranges should be published.

Suspected ranges should be kept confidential so as to maintain the integrity of the published data.

Ranges should not be disclosed verbally or otherwise to individuals or small groups prior to publication to the greater community.

Details about the printing and numbering of current banknotes should be publicized to encourage transparency of the process without laying it all out from A to Z.

The individuals running and overseeing this operation should have a thorough understanding of the manners in which banknotes are printed and numbered to ensure reliable results.

The organization of this group and endeavour should not attempt to begin operations without at least the consent or cooperation of Gilles Pomerleau, out of respect for his contributions to this hobby and because doing otherwise is just plain wrong.

 

Forth, I nominate BC for the first national symposium on Canadian journey series insert notes to be here. At least we expect one day of rain this week Sunday. Be sure to bring your collections for the show-and-tell segment.    

If you can cover my flight, I am there.   Actually I am heading out there soon anyway .

Please everyone have a good night.
Huds

Now that we are at it for several weeks, everyone that has something to say or criticize has his/her chance.  I am happy to see many have some ideas as to how to deal  the updating and determining the ranges of the new inserts.  The problem is many of them are quite similar or even identical so if you start to read them you will finish confused.   Would Brent  or Hudson or anyone be kind enough to go through them and summarize them, so that all of us can decide which method is best and vote on them ?Meanwhile, would Hudson be knid enough to tell us what his plan is ?

Hi.  
My article is more geared towards the determining of inserts.  It is going through some refining, and I have to gettherest of the information in it.
I do not want to rush this thing out and miss something due to trying to be fast.  Sooner than later.

Huds

Yes, I agree.

We should summerize the points that have been provided so we can then give direction back to the thread.

Again, I am [size=12]KINDLY REQUESTING[/size] that the name of this thread be RENAMED because many members I have talked to have never even read the thread as the name does not even give a clue to that the topic of conversation is about.

It should read something like: "Proposed new System for Determining & Reporting Inserts" or something like that.

Thank You.
Cam

Well,

Where are we at?

Is this issue now being left on the side of the road to die?  :-/

As far as I can tell we haven't got to step one yet.  I am still awaiting Hud's article which is based on, more or less taking into account the suggestions in this thread so far. Then when it's published, all members could give it a thorough read. I too would like to see other members get in on this. Suggest that Brent or someone issue a blanket message to all members to solicit some feedback on the key issues. A questionaire perhaps?

-one-
I believe the article should first outline what is the current system we have now. This gives the newer members to see what this 'black box' is and to more senior members confirm what we accept as the current system. State what is the objective of the Insert note system supposed to do.

-two-
Then that would provide the basis for what we have to work with to identify the weaknesses before making any potential beneficial changes where needed. I'm sure Huds would be open to further debate, new suggestions, and revisions before proposing the 'new' system and set some tangible objectives to see if the changes actually meet the objectives.

-three-
Implement the 'new' system. How long before we could we do this?

-four-
Evaluation, that requires feedback from members, especially the newer members. Perhaps tweaking some would happen around here or tightening the objectives a bit. Another questionaire?

-five-
After some time, further evaluation. etc. Step four.

PD

PD brings up some good points that will have to be thought about. I think everyone is waiting to see what becomes of this.  
I also think that this could be a slipperly slope if it is not handled carefully.  I would like to mention a few things in point form.  (Because I am tight for time right now):

1) The system right now IS working.  It has its glitches i.e. time delays, but any system will have glitches, as long as it is run by human beings.

2) Revamping of the system is not really what is neccessary, the suggestion arose out of a "back-up" plan idea in case something were ever to happen.  However, having shared roles and a panel are probably good ideas in case something were to happen.

3) Even with the amount of brick searchers that there are, there are still some things that we will never know for sure in regards to how notes are inserted.  I think Gilles does an amazing job at coordinating what he does, with the amount of people he has reporting to him.  We must remember that with out his hard work, this branch would not be established as it is (amongst his other contributions).

4) Accountability and accuracy will be ensured by it being a group effort.  That is kind of echoing what is realy happening now in practice to some degree.

So, we must be sure not to move too hasty, otherwise decisions might be made that we may regret later.  This issue is not left on the side road to die--  an issue as big as this needs time.  

In the meantime, I think it would be wise for us to not forget how important it is that we all work together, and all under a common direction.  Right now, for inserts, that is Gilles.

Please don't worry, this thread is not left for dead.  However, please do not expect this to fly through so quickly.  That would not be fair to anyone.

 All for now- back to work for me.
H