I hope RAT stays an open forum

[stevesarak]

As some of you have known since I first joined RAT, I’m a private collector. I never collect anything illegal, everything I collect from out of the U.S. has that government’s export papers with it. Some of the pieces I acquire come from museums. A lot of museums don’t have all their pieces on display, a lot is never seen or will ever be seen by the public. When a museum decides to let some of their pieces go to make room for other pieces, they don’t usually make a big deal of it and open it up to the general public. Some like to keep it quite, that’s their choice, and I respect it.

When I’m informed that there are certain pieces being made available, I use different sources to do research. One of them is RAT, there are a lot of informative people here, and it’s an easy quick way to get information, or pointed in the right direction to get information, that might otherwise take time.

Most members of RAT have always been open to sharing information for the sake of sharing information, without any conditions being attached. Most understand that some of the people asking question might be private collectors, people checking on new finds that can’t be released to the public yet, or some people doing research on private projects that they don’t want released yet.

The bottom line is, at least since I’ve been with RAT, that this is a place to share ideas and information, for the sake of sharing with people interested in a mutual interest. If some people can’t share information without it being conditional, then I hope it stays to those few, and doesn’t spread to the many. This has always been an open forum, even when it comes to religion, I hope it doesn’t change.

Steve - member since February of 2006

[Robert Vermaat]

If some people can’t share information without it being conditional, then I hope it stays to those few, and doesn’t spread to the many.

Hi Steve. I hear you and I share your sentiments. However, I do hope that you realise that you are part of the problem. You ask for information from others but when push comes to shove you refrain from sharing. I believe that's why the members who pulled out of the discussion acted like they did.

Now, this does not mean that you must offer the information on the forum. You could choose to contact the person(s) involved in the discussion and share the information privately. I have done so on more than one occasion and received private material with the promise not to publish it in any way. This worked out perfectly.

It's a two-way system - you want information, you share information. If for some justified reason your information can't be shared on the forum, that's OK, but you can't expect an open discussion under those restrictions.

[sonic]

I think also that part of the problem lies with people who are not yet confident enough to share an opinion. It is all too easy to be aware of the shortcomings of your knowledge and remain unaware that what you actually know is not common knowledge to everybody else.

Also, when offering opinions and information it is all too easy to think that other people will criticise your views. This is true, but in the majority of cases differences of opinion are just that: opinion. In the Roman period the facts are usually open to interpretation. Just because you have read something that is different to the interpretations offered on this forum does not mean that it is wrong!

I must ask SS, though: is there any specific reason for your post? If it is because you know of one or two individuals that have knowledge but who aren't willing to share, then that is their loss: without debate, how can we expand our understanding of the ancient world?

[stevesarak]

I must ask SS, though: is there any specific reason for your post? If it is because you know of one or two individuals that have knowledge but who aren't willing to share, then that is their loss: without debate, how can we expand our understanding of the ancient world?

Hi,

I’ve been told of a piece available and am doing research on it to see if I might want to pick it up.

I had a good discussion going in Roman Military History & Archaeology. Some of the members wanted to know where the piece came from, but as I’ve said above, for obvious reasons I can’t always say where it comes from, even privately.

Since I wouldn’t tell them were it came from, they got offended and pulled out of the discussion.

[Magnus]

Referencing this thread: http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0

More specifically the 2nd page.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Well, basically the discussion in the other thread is a rule violation.
I am quoting a part of forum rule # 4:

If you can show that the item is provenanced or held by a museum/established collector, you may discuss the items for sale. When in doubt, ask a moderator! This policy exists to discourage the trade in illegal antiquities, which destroys countless archaeological sites in the hunt for artifacts.

So, as you see, the members which withdrew from the discussions seem to have acted absolutely correctly. RAT was and is an open forum, but it has rules, which have to be followed. In this case you should have provided the item´s provenance from the very beginning, in accordance with the rules. If you can´t you should try to find an other forum for your questions. It is impossible for anyone to find out whether this item actually is provenanced or not. What is suspicious, IMO, is that the seller does not want to be public. If it really were a Museum / Institution selling provenanced items, why should they hide? There´s no logical reason for such behaviour. Unless, maybe, the museum wants to get rid of stuff that was illegally obtained (remember the scandal around the art-black market, the Getty Museum and the Met, which still stirs the scene). But then... : forum rule # 4 again...

[Tarbicus]

Steve, I asked for provenance from the outset. Sorry, but it's just the way it is. Quid pro quo.

[Robert Vermaat]

for obvious reasons I can’t always say where it comes from, even privately.

Why obvious reasons?

But if you really can't give that information, you should not have discussed the piece to begin with.

[sonic]

for obvious reasons I can’t always say where it comes from, even privately.

Why obvious reasons?

But if you really can't give that information, you should not have discussed the piece to begin with.

What obvious reasons? If the reasons are obvious, why can't we be told?

I must agree with VS: if you can't verify the provenance of your material, it is unfair to ask everyone for information. It's all a matter of trust, and unfortunately, with the diverse origins of the posters, that has to be earned. I still wonder why you haven't explained - in confidence - to one of the moderators why you can't reveal your source. If one of them was to support your claim that the source can't be revealed for good reason, others would trust you more.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

The obvious reasons being......



:twisted:

M.VIB.M.

[stevesarak]

The obvious reasons being......



:twisted:

M.VIB.M.

Oh the pain, the pain.

The reason is two fold:
1) I don’t want to tip other collectors that there’s a piece up for sale.

2) There are some people and places that only sell items discreetly, (all legally with export papers and everything) and they don’t want it posted on open forums, they only deal directly with certain collectors and buyers. They’re not selling things illegally, but it’s their choice to keep a low profile. It’s not up to me to question them, it’s their choice, and I respect it.

So when I post a picture and am asking question about it, its not that I’m selling or buying something illegal, it’s just as I said, as a private collector that is contacted by certain people or groups, I can’t always divulge the source. So I’m just throwing out a picture here and there and asking question, nothing more.

[Magnus]

Well, that explanation is good enough for me, but I think that should have come a long time before the first post in this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, that explanation is more than reasonable.

[stevesarak]

Well, that explanation is good enough for me, but I think that should have come a long time before the first post in this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, that explanation is more than reasonable.

Here’s the core of the problem, that answer did come a long time before the first post, It was a long thread back in 2006 when I first joined, and was brought up a couple of times since. I forgot (my fault) that there are new people or people that have been away for awhile. I just assumed that everyone knew that I’m a private collector. Oh well, we’re all human.

So, oops, sorry about that.

[Magnus]

2006? Buddy, I can't remember what I did yesterday. 8)

[Robert Vermaat]

Well, that explanation is good enough for me, but I think that should have come a long time before the first post in this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, that explanation is more than reasonable.

Here’s the core of the problem, that answer did come a long time before the first post, It was a long thread back in 2006 when I first joined, and was brought up a couple of times since. I forgot (my fault) that there are new people or people that have been away for awhile. I just assumed that everyone knew that I’m a private collector. Oh well, we’re all human.

So, oops, sorry about that.

No problem Steve. I'm sure that if you would share the proper information with the persons who could tell you what you need to know, they would be happy to promise you to keep things secret. Myself, i have done so many times in the past, and to my great satisfation I have no seen anything of the privately shared information published anywhere else. Those of you who shared this with me know what I'm talking about.

So to answer your initial question Steve - YES, we are an open forum, and we are even discreet enough to share non-publishable information between members.