Okay Dave, I mention I would not continue arguing, and I still intend not to. But I believe I owe you, at least, presenting my reasoning since it seems to be lost on you. I'm going to use the aristotelian logic, numbered. I don't want to give a sense, by using this format, that I'm being condescending, 'cause I'm not... It's just an easier way of presenting the arguments in order. It's just the 'old man' way of presenting things:
1 - Poster initially mentioned chips were damaged.
2 - I politely disagreed and explained the reasons for my disagreement.
3 - A different poster, you, accused me of being crazy for not considering the chips damaged.
4 - I am not crazy, therefore, according to you, I MUST consider the chips damaged (otherwise I would be crazy)
5 - If I MUST think, according to you, that the chips are damaged and I STILL maintain I don't believe they are, I MUST be misrepresenting the condition of the chips.
6 - If I am misrepresenting the condition of the chips, according to the reasoning above, I'm dishonest and a cheat.
7 - Therefore you are implicitly accusing me of being dishonest (as I am not crazy)
That's the logic...
I already spent too much time writing here... This is a hobby I love and that brings me lots of joy... If starts to bring me heartache, I'm out...
One of the things that I've always strived for is to be an honest man. When someone questions that, even after all I did to be as open as possible about the condition of the chips, I DO take offense. Specially in a thread about selling those chips, when other people are reading how the sale is done. To me, again it's very damaging... I have lots of friends here and the last thing I want is my character questioned.
A discussion of the 'exact meaning' of 'damaged' is ABSOLUTELY irrelevant for the argument here. It MUST be taken in context... I am no 'dummy' not to know the meaning of it... We are talking general sense in regards to chips. I've been collecting sets for years and have seen thousands and thousand of ads, offers, etc... I have NEVER seen anyone referring to chips like that as damaged, certainly and specially not when it's expressly stated they are casino used with nicks! Maybe when there's a sale of ONLY single mint chips and among them there's one with a sizable nick, then maybe that chip is referred to as damaged, but that's in context to the other mint chips... Other than that, damaged chips refer to broken chips, missing inlay, cracked, etc...
Okay, that's my last piece here... I know I should have let go a few times, but I'm far from perfect... I consider myself the 'easiest-going' guy around but when something gets me, it really gets me...
Apologies to all of those that might be reading the thread... It wasn't my intention to turn it into a back and forth...
I hope the logic presented above can resonate with you... If it doesn't, there's nothing else I can do... We'll be playing together live and virtually, commenting in threads, reviewing chips, etc, so there's no sense and keep this shit going...
You certainly do have that right... but NOBODY ever said or implied that you were dishonest. That's misunderstanding's on you. Sorry you got offended over nothing.