Mr Slotta's rude attack seems out of place in this forum, and while it probably should not be dignified by a reply, it begs for correction. Judging from the rule on commercial postings provided by the list moderator, signature blocks are perfectly acceptable, as are catalogue announcements. The earlier posting of my own that Mr Slotta cites as an example of a commercial posting, if I recall correctly, was a follow-up to previous postings by others about the disposal of the Nick Karanovich collection. Finally, Mr. Slotta's own commercial posting solicited contacts (bids?) from interested parties for material he had himself consigned to auction. He made his solicitation without disclosing his ownership of the material in question. This was hardly a friendly informational notice as some supposed, but a blatant example of "touting his own stock" while failing to disclose his own financial interest. Did he intend to reveal his financial interest to those who contacted him? Only Mr Slotta knows the answer to that question, but it seems reasonable to me that if he intended proper disclosure he would have done so someplace in his posting. The crux of this matter is disclosure of commercial interest, and the listserv rule on disclosure is quite clear in the rule posted by the moderator. No amount of smoke blown in any direction can obscure this. Booksellers and private individuals often consign property for sale at auction, and this allows them anonymity. People seek the anonymity of auctions for a variety of reasons -- one reason would be the innocent wish for privacy, while at the other extreme some use auctions to put forged, fake or stolen material into the market. But regardless of why somebody chooses to sell at auction, if the owner of a property promotes the sale of their own property without disclosing their own financial stake, and especially if they should go so far as to solicit bids (from a potential buyer for whom they would act as agent, or to encourage that potential buyer to bid directly with the auctioneer who is acting as the seller's agent) without disclosing their ownership of the property in question, it raises serious questions of disclosure, self-dealing, agency, and fiduciary duty. I make no apology for asking my intitial two questions. Mr Slotta has chosen not to answer the first question, but the answer to the second one is clear -- the listserv rules on commerical postings require disclosure, and that did not happen in this case. Kevin Mac Donnell Austin TX