> Although I lurk for the most part I do feel compelled to toss my 2 cents
> in at times for whatever it is worth.
> The 18-year time-line seems somewhat strange, just cannot figure out why
> it would be 18 and not 20 years.
I think that the rolling time line is missing the point... If this was adopted then in eight years something from 1990 would meet the criteria and so on... They can have their own list;)
The 1983/1984 cutoff date is definitely campagnolo biased but seems the cutoff is acceptable to most. But what counts is what sir list miester, the man whose party is open to all who play by the rules decides.
Some have stricter guideline than Dale as far as criteria such as frame building techniques, etc...
pre-1983 bikes, components, etc all seem on topic. Lugged frames that I want to brag about after that timeline that may be outfitted with 1983, or earlier components may meet criteria in my minds eye but...
When in doubt about a post, ask Dale if it's on topic or not. I am sure he will try to be objective and use discretion if it benefits the list.
Mike "Mostly lurking and still a greenhorn" Wilkinson Parker, CO