14 Apr
2005
14 Apr
'05
10:05 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Computer Collector Newsletter wrote:
I think a bigger problem, and one that needs to be
solved first, is
determining the size and scope of our hobby. How can even experts like
Sellam say "this hobby, as a whole, is so un/mis-informed..." when we're
not
sure what that "whole" is in the first place?
No offense meant Evan, or any other proponents of this thread, but
I disagree that we need taxonomic analysis of what's essentially a
hobby. To what end this finely dividing us into categories?
While I recognize that the occasional artifact has intrinsic
value, most artifacts do not, no matter how old, and people prop
up insecurity with the alleged monetary value of their toys. I
like and use old computers, but I don't fool myself that they all
have any value to anyone but me and occasionally a tiny minority
of fellow fans.
I don't need to have monetary value attached to artifacts I like
to convince others they are worthwhile.
I fully engage and am comfortable with the need, and simple
desire, to buy, sell and even profit from "fun" artifacts, but I
intensely dislike the commodification of the culture itself and
will do what I can to undermine that.
Commodication of culture is a horrible capitalist tendency. I hope
this stops here.