[jacksoncoupage]

I also think the front page needs a FAQ. Any suggestions for it? Anything that you'd specifically like to see in it?

I personally think this thread should be renamed, with "Error &" removed, as it's primarily focused on variations, as opposed to errors. I also think you should make that point in the FAQ. I'm not saying that errors are unimportant, but they probably deserve their own thread, so one doesn't confuse the other. I'd say it's a variation if it can be seen in many or most cards in a set, and an error if it's only found in one or a handful. Anyone agree? Disagree?

I also think it's not a bad idea to include the UD gold holograms. Yeah, they're relatively well-known, but not everyone is aware of them. Same for the Donruss border variations. (FYI, I firmly believe that not ALL 1988 Donruss cards have border variations. I busted a sealed set about a year ago, and only the Will Clark DK was different than the stack of duplicates I had at home. Now, it's possible I had 15 factory singles and no wax, but that's highly unlikely.)

Oh, one more point on the variation v. error issue. I consider a variation to be intentional, as opposed to, well, an error (most of the time, anyway). The *, ** and INC.,INC are examples. Sure, they're different, but I'm sure there was a good reason for that, and someone at Topps or Donruss could tell us why they made the distinction. (The *denotes* and *denotes aren't the same, but affect so many cards that it makes sense to call it an error, at least in my book.)

Ramble off.

I am all for reshaping this growing thread. I am still unsure about dropping the error part right now. One collector's error question may lead to variation news for us all. Creating a separate thread for unlisted errors would be a way to go though. I'm hesitant because it may become a pain moving info back and forth from posts between the two topics. The error vs. variation issue seems sensitive enough that not every collector has such a refined POV on it. Plus, it's much easier for me to make small "asides" to you guys about a card I find that may be specific to your players and not a set-spanning variation, here in this thread.

If you guys don't mind that stuff and feel that it will help this thread then I 'm cool with reformatting it those are just my hesitations. Any specific ideas for new titles?

Error vs. Variation. I think that a looser definition is best. Creating a too-linear definition will confuse many who are new to the game. A lot of these minute differences can be confusing enough but also having to figure out the guidelines and details on what is an "acceptable" variation and isn't seems tough. As it stands our first page is a growing list of confirmed variations that affect a large portion of a set (1982 Topps Blackless) or affects a set that contains several of the BMB-collected players (1994 UD Choice White letters for example-a subset that has early cards of Jeter, Arod, Johnny Damon and Derek Lee).

I believe that anything that comes in two (or more) different ways, but was not specifically intended to should be labeled a variation. A prime example would be the 1978 Topps Dick Williams card. There are 4 different types of "boxing" around his first name on front. I call this an error as well as a variation. I guarantee that people at Topps did not want even one version to be released with a box drawn around that specific part of his name. Yet it can be found with 4 different versions. Often times, I find myself cataloging a card as an "error-variation" because it was clearly unintended by the company but exists in multiple varieties.

As for the 88 Donruss, I am doubtful every card comes in two types as well. I'd really like to look into further though. All the "gospel" on the subject seems to claim that only two cards weren't affected, but like you, I have serious doubts about this. I may have to break a couple soon.

EDIT:

I almost forgot. What do you think specifically should be addressed in the FAQ?