Badge Of Merit For The Aircraft Industry

[Gary Symonds]

Gaston, how could "new collectors be fooled" by a demand for evidence?

You are simply accepting Jo Rivett's conclusions without supporting evidence.

In my opinion, sarcastic as it may seem, new collectors are put at a disadvantage by accepting on face value and faith, the opinions of others.

Do you like my gold stickpin? The picture is very clear.

Any doubts it is an original?

By the way, how many gold stickpins, even if you did not like them have you seen? In all my 24 years of collecting, this example is the only one I have ever seen.

Please advise.

[Matthew]

Here are mine. Too bad they're only in stickpin.

cheers

Matt

[Gary Symonds]

Matthew, thanks for posting the picture of your gold stickpin.

Other than the gold example I posted, your's is the only other gold stickpin I've seen.

Do other members have gold stickpins that they can post?

Even a "fake" one would be desireable.

[RonR]

One each of the silver.........


......................

[RonR]

23

[Rick C]

Well, this is an interesting thread - for the attractive stick pins in question.

Gary Symonds rightfully points out that Gaston is “simply accepting Jo Rivett's conclusions without supporting evidence.” Rommel points out “I don't see much in line of sharing any proof of what is real or not.” As he goes on to say “We all want to learn.” Well, if sarcasm can prompt some sharing of evidence one way of the other, I’m all for it.

If there’s a ‘tell’ with regard to these things then I think it falls on Jo to “tell” us.

[Jo Rivett]

If there’s ‘tell’ with regard to these things then I think it falls on Jo to “tell” us.

Rick, i couldn't agree more. I have said it before, and will say it again: "Listen to Rick"
I have sent the MODs a PM, as a really need to shake a troll, before i proceed. I am away all of this week, and will be back for the weekend, for the "show n tell" (you omitted "show" ) as long as the troll can be silenced. If he cant, then there will be no show, or tell, or Jo Rivett on waf anymore, and this will be my last post.
Until the weekend - or not.

[jabnus]

Matthew, thanks for posting the picture of your gold stickpin.

Other than the gold example I posted, your's is the only other gold stickpin I've seen.

Here's two more, pics not mine and unfortunately small, but i did examine them in hand. I liked one and the other i didn't, guess which one i liked?

I was offered another one which i probably have the pictures of still somewhere on my old computer, but i lack the time to go searching for it at the moment and am already glad i can login and reply today. I saw yet another one at a fair a few years ago, but had at the time spent my cash on something else. That makes four gold ones for me. Yes they are rare, but they are out there if you look for them.

[jabnus]

As to the other replies, yes i think the community is not helped with sarcastic replies. This is a badge most collectors have never seen for real, and probably are not even aware of it exists, confusing everyone with sarcastic replies is not helpfull.

About accepting conclusions or Gary and Rick pointing out that i am simply accepting them, i might have one very valuable tip: please read more and spent more time investigating small badges and medals. It's a real eyeopener what fakes do exist and have been made over the years. The next part is to try and understand the extreme level and amount of fakes that have been produced over the past 7 decades and that most people are not aware of. The really hardest part is to accept this as real. Many collectors refuse this and when they are presented evidence it either hits them very hard or they refuse to believe this. I too have been there and once i found (more) out i was blown away and almost lost my fun in collecting. The only way to go forward is to educate yourself and accept that fakes exist of almost everything and of many things in collections. If i may say so, i've been quite busy and missed a lot of topics lately, but from what i've read the past days it seems a bit like a problem to accept that certain items are not good. Even more so if such items are owned. It's all a learning experience and unfortunately an expensive one for some.


To get back to the accepting of conclusions of Jo, i've collected badges for a long time as well and have been looking in microforensics a bit too. Im not claiming im an expert in anything, but i think i do understand his posts in this topic with the flamepicture and micropicture and yes they are eyeopeners for everyone who is colecting and researching in this area and knows what to look at. For me this is not a case of "accepting" or "not accepting" Jo's or Gary's idea's of how a real or fake badge should look like, it's about looking at the evidence (which in this case supports my own gut feeling as well) and follow that.

The sarcasm, the elevated reply like "how many have you seen" (more than most people that have replied or even follow this topic i guess!), the "accepting conclusions"..., it is not at all helpfull or needed in this discussion and diverts from what it's all about. Just my opinion.

What we need in this hobby is an examination of as many (small) badges as we can, and by doing so if possible the elimination of fakes. Not only SS raised pins (which i don't like and have never liked too), Treuewerk abzeichen, Frauenschaft badges, NSKK badges, or whatever other badges, but EVERY badge and medal. I bet an original Bloodorder on it that many many many collectors will be devastated by such research and discover they have a lot of fakes in their collections. This is the only way to be sure of anything. If you are not open for examination or to accept that fakes exist you could either just throw your money in the fireplace, or leave the forums forever and just buy whatever bling-bling you like and treasure it without wanting to know if it's real or not.


Gary, regarding your gold badge, the picture is quite small on my screen but i think i do see some details to say something about it already, not with microforensics you seem to dislike, but by looking at old fashioned details of it's mold. (By the way i also realise i just posted two small pictures of gold ones myself, but those were posted as a reply to your question how many i've seen). Either way, your badge appears to have an "eye" and different eaglehead as the non raised badges. That i don't like. Look at the non raised badges, they appear all to have a different head (which i like more), it's less detailed and more straight. From this small picture i am also not too impressed by for example the shape of the claws on the white enamelfield (and yes im very much aware of how enameling works and why differences exist in shapes in enamel). Please proof me wrong by posting better pictures of obverse and reverse. Im not out to discredit your badge or you, but you made a game of your own badge and ask for opinions. The sarcasm and bad picture may very well work against you here instead of help anyone determine the originality of these rare badges (or their fakes).

Just my two cents. I'll try and be more online the coming days to follow this interesting topic.

best regards,
Gaston

[Rick C]

With respect sir, “read more”? Has anyone written anything here one could read with which conclusions might be formed? Can you point to some “presented evidence”? Frankly, I think we’re getting ahead of ourselves because I must’ve missed the ‘evidence’ that was presented somewhere - anywhere - that would warrant ANYONE “accepting” anything.

I may be just a lowly collector who’ll clearly never amount to much because I (with some others apparently) can’t seem to fathom much more than Jo cast some aspersions on some pins. You say (apparently) asking for clarification “is not at all helpful or needed in this discussion and diverts from what it's all about”. Perhaps you should articulate for the uneducated, such as myself, “what it's all about” if not making a cogent presentation for your beliefs, addressing what criticism might come of your argument and allowing the community (if we can call it that) to decide given any FACTS presented.

The “sarcasm” is intended to force some empirical evidence out of someone. (All I can say at this point is thank god I don’t own one of these because, beyond pretty pictures, I’ve seen nothing written to hang a hat on.)

[Gary Symonds]

In response to Janbus' reasoned and cogent post 24, it appears you believe I "dislike" micro forensics. That is truly surprising, because I have been saying in all of the forums and all of the threads where author Rivett has claimed "reproduction," for him to show us the absence of such micro forensics, or "micro-patina" as author Rivett named it.

Again and again, I have demanded this evidence, which I have gone on record over and over again, as a valid forensic tool. Author Rivett, as all of you readers of these various threads on the SS stickpins, the Kindeschar badges, and aircraft workers badge, and the latest bolt from above, HJ Gold Honor Badges marked M1/70, refuses to post this evidence. Even though Author Rivett was supplied with my examples of the SS and HJ for forensic examination, and evidence or lack thereof of "micro-patina," he has refused to post it.

Janbus, you raise a good point that the heads of the eagles show a different configuration. We know that the National Socialist Party did take the word "socialist" somewhat seriously, and almost always tried to spread the work around in the medals industry. We see many a common military badge made by various makers, with small differences in detail.

In this aircraft badge, it is obvious that a contract was made with at least two makers. One that had a detailed eye and one that did not. One who used an incised patent marking, and one maker that used a raised patent marking.

There is nothing more nefarious going on. Both badges are consistent with period manufacture and materials.

Both are original to the Third Reich period.

[Gary Symonds]

Rick, i couldn't agree more. I have said it before, and will say it again: "Listen to Rick"
I have sent the MODs a PM, as a really need to shake a troll, before i proceed. I am away all of this week, and will be back for the weekend, for the "show n tell" (you omitted "show" ) as long as the troll can be silenced. If he cant, then there will be no show, or tell, or Jo Rivett on waf anymore, and this will be my last post.
Until the weekend - or not.

Gentlemen, author Rivett in response to Rick C's demand for evidence, posts another incomprehensible statement as a substitute for evidence, instead of evidence.

Author Rivett then talks about "silencing a troll," threatening that if the "troll" is not "silenced" author Rivett will pick up his marbles,and quit the "waf."

Author Rivett's demand for the silencing of a critic, sounds kinda like an unnamed nation in central Europe, in the first half of the 20th century, that loved to do the same thing.

Author Rivett, by all means please keep your promise, and make post 22 your "last."

[Rick C]

Apparently, the contestants are marshaling their facts so that they might provide those suffering from less ‘enlightenment’ (such as myself) with the data necessary to convince us of their positions which, to the neophyte, appears to revolve around the existence of an eye in the die and the raised lettering on the rear and/or (maybe?) the fixturing of the pin?

Of course, a dope such as myself immediately questions what’s the big deal? Multiple makers, multiple dies, subtle differences, big woo! Well, the contestants seem to think there’s a “big woo” or at least some secret “woo” data that they’re drawing out the publishing of and therein is one of my issues with this forum. As Scott/Rommel points out “We all want to learn..” but, seemingly, those of us who want to learn something need to contend with blue smoke & mirrors, personalities and battles of the ‘experts’ before we’re allowed to learn anything and so, my frustration.

For me, I see nothing wrong with either variant. Why, I wonder, would one presume there would be only one supplier of these without hard, documentable, written proof because when I think of the 20 Juli Wound Badge, the smallest production run of a Reich badge (only 24 immediately issued) there were two dies made by Junker as well as a Godet. If there is proof of sole sourcing, why do the unenlightened have to wait for clarification of claims? How freaking hard is it guys? I don’t care about Jo’s troll problems and I don’t care that some might not like Jo’s dry sense of humor (which I find funny) but I’m with Scott gentlemen; make your presentations and let us learn something or don’t make unfounded comments.

[jabnus]

Hi Rick,

To educate the uneducated like yourself as you ask for:


Please read my post better and don't lay words in my mouth i didn't say (or wrote).


I said that the sarcasm is not helpfull for particularly new collectors, not that asking for clarification is bad, that is actually all that i want. You seem to be possibly ahead of yourself here?

The words "Read more" are typed with regards to investigating small badges and medals. Not with regards to Jo's posts you refer and try to confuse everyone also with in your post (i get back to those under here). You try to twist and turn things for whatever reason, but please don't write that i said things i didn't say. If as a collector and participant of this forum and topic, you were to READ MORE like appearantly some of us have done over the years, you would:

a) have more knowledge about fakes
b) have more knowledge about MANY (or should i write MUCH MORE?) fakes that have been made
c) have maybe one day the knowledge to accept that much more items many people regard as real are fake
d) have the decency not to reply the way you do and twist other people's words for a reason only you know and benefit from
e) maybe understand how certain evidence (like the MSC picture) works and why it should raise some alert to every collector to say the least!
e) know what that same evidence can teach you and
g) know how that same evidence can help you and every collector to disinguish good from bad.
h) know why your reply comes over as quite disrespectfull indeed



The evidence you missed is the micropicture from Jo. Im not sure if you know his book? If not you should read it before making replies that you "missed the evidence". It's one of the best collectorsbooks out since long and one that will influence forums and topics like this one for many decades to come.

Everything Jo writes can be checked by everyone, even the small micropicture from the reverse of this badge with raised reverse posted on page one. If you think that whatever he wrote somewhere is not right, then by all means please proof him wrong? It should be simple for you? I know i tried several times and ended up learning a lot by doing so. Im sure that someone who can make posts like you do, can easily check the method he questions for themselves? Appearantly your not a novice collector or forumparticipant. Why esle make the posts you make, right? This has nothing to do with being a lowly collector too, you may present yourself like that here, but it's totally irrelevant how "big" someone is or wants to be if he choses himself to participate in the discussion. Evidence, remember? You mention it yourself although you mask your words with (at least for me) impressive words and talk around everything. I think Jo presented evidence indeed by showing a raised marked pin (in the flame picture, which can tell much more if you know what to look for, which again is why i mentioned: read more!) and the MSC picture (which again you will understand better if you know more about it, thus need to read more if you haven't done yet). The excuse of "because I must’ve missed the ‘evidence’" is really a crazy remark. There are over the past few years countless forumtopics about them on this forum already made and also on other forums like helmet forums outside of WAF. You are long enough around and have responded in enough topics to know at least something of micropictures. So again: whats your angle in this? If you reply and don't have anything to say than why reply? Only to stir things up? Or because of soemthing else? I read the word "troll" several times here and had to look it up, i can udnerstand why it is used. This topic could benefit a lot with some cleaning of (sarcastic) posts.

Not exclusively to you, but in general and also for new collectors who might decide to jump in this pool of fakes that is called small badge collecting: If you read more about small badges, study the 1960s/70's/80's fake catalogs, study badges and investigation methods at all, study period booklets and publications, read about microforensics, et cetera, it will become easier to understand what a few simple images can tell and learn you. Again, you don't need to make such posts as post #21 and #25. With all the highlighted text, quotes and defending of sarasm it makes you look bad. One can only wonder why? Whats your angle? As a forummember it should be about learning or teaching others who want to learn, about the items posted, no? It seems as if you're just trying to mess the topic up by defending sarcasm that confuses knowledge. It should be about clarification and to learn more, not your purposely confusing and diverting "troll" posts. (see? I used the word too?).


Asking for clarifications is what we all want, well i say "we" but appearantly not you and perhps Gary. You two rather "troll around" (see i used the word again too) and posts sarcasm, make instead of posting relevant information games with small pictures about the item talked about and you even make your last posts to talk that sarcasm good? Is that how clarification works? As a non native speaker im already glad i can read this, and i know of many collectorsfriends who speak even less English (is that even possible? LoL), maybe you should just ask for clarification instead of adding confusing sarcasm? Maybe you should not hide behind the "im a lowly collector" but try to contribute and not divert from the discussion by hiding behind posts that add nothing in regards of information as well? "What it is all about" is finding more evidence to learn us more about originals. Thats what WAF is all about, and with a massive number of 3270 posts you should be well aware of that. So maybe i should ask again, if that is not you goal, than why do you make these posts? You don't have one of these badges, yet you want clarification, but you add nothing to the table and defend sarcasm and confuse everyone and everything a lot with your posts?

I'll be off working again for the rest of the day untill tonight, should be a good read to check what else you add to the topic. Or is it an attempt to divert from it all and ruin the topic for another reason?

[jabnus]

Janbus, you raise a good point that the heads of the eagles show a different configuration. We know that the National Socialist Party did take the word "socialist" somewhat seriously, and almost always tried to spread the work around in the medals industry. We see many a common military badge made by various makers, with small differences in detail.

In this aircraft badge, it is obvious that a contract was made with at least two makers. One that had a detailed eye and one that did not. One who used an incised patent marking, and one maker that used a raised patent marking.

There is nothing more nefarious going on. Both badges are consistent with period manufacture and materials.

Both are original to the Third Reich period.

Hi Gary,

To get back on track with the discussion. Im afraid it works both ways, what evidence do you have that it is obvious more contractors where used? How can you proof that both are original?

Saying something is original is the same as saying something is not. Both parties who say such things should be able to proof their facts?


Look at the picture with the "bubble-bubble lettering" as Jo calls it on page one, isn't that much more evidence as making the conclusion the raised badge must be original because the NSDAP used more contractors on other badges? Im sorry to have to say, but for me it is not in line at all with what we have learned over the years about Third Reich quality of original badges and surface details/patination.

To avoid getting new meaningless posts from Rick again: im not defending or denying anything or anyone, all i want is to learn what gold and silver badges are original (that is "what it is all about"). If it turns out more makers or variations are good im happy, if it turns out some are bad im happy too as i would have learned something. We could really do without confusion, sarcasm or offtopic posts.

best regards,
Gaston