What do we know? I mean really.

Ed · 7th July 2016, 03:57 AM

I think that you are reading too much into what I am saying.

To strip the argument to it's bare bones, when we say that a piece is "good", ie authentic, based on hard evidence, we are probably correct.

When we say that a piece is "bad" ie fake/repro, based on a lack of examples, we are on thin ice since our sample base is woefully inadequate to claim that it is representative.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

7th July 2016, 03:57 AM	#9
Ed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 285	I think that you are reading too much into what I am saying. To strip the argument to it's bare bones, when we say that a piece is "good", ie authentic, based on hard evidence, we are probably correct. When we say that a piece is "bad" ie fake/repro, based on a lack of examples, we are on thin ice since our sample base is woefully inadequate to claim that it is representative.