5 ms·

Weird. I wouldn’t care to see most artifacts if admission was free, but I have a problem with someone cutting them into pieces.

• codezero 10y ago
  Agreed, but I assume most of these were in terrible condition to start with. I'm surprised they don't mention it in their FAQ so I could be wrong. As an example they have this to say about the 14th century samurai sword: While lovely, the blade has a number of micro-fractures that made it unsuitable, and potentially dangerous, as a collectible.
  • bykovich 10y ago
    The critical issue here is not something's value as a "collectible." We're not caddisfly larvae.
    • codezero 10y ago
      Sorry, I might be stupid, but I'm not sure what you're saying. What _is_ the critical issue? Generally destroying objects? There is some spectrum between a usable item and complete refuse, it feels like most of the stuff being cut up is closer to refuse, but I could be very wrong.
      • sparky_z 10y ago
        Destroying objects that have historical value (which is distinct from collectible value). As an exaggerated example, you wouldn't chop up a Dead Sea Scroll into tiny fragments just because it's useless as bedtime reading. The fact that collectors would be willing to buy very tiny pieces of dead sea scroll (perhaps collectively netting more than the sale of a single intact scroll) doesn't make it okay.