RE: [CR]Comment on Cirque bike classification: "original" v. "restored"

(Example: Framebuilding:Brazing Technique)

From: Stephen James <sj52@hotmail.com>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: RE: [CR]Comment on Cirque bike classification: "original" v. "restored"
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:57:32 +0000
In-Reply-To: <005201c8dd3b$feefda80$6701a8c0@gatewaygpcezcz>
References: <005201c8dd3b$feefda80$6701a8c0@gatewaygpcezcz>


I am curious why the distinction is between "original" and "restored", ra ther than "restored" and "unrestored", for example.

What, incidentally, would be the groups' idea of criteria for restorati on. Is repainting too much?

Steve James Bx., NY> From: cnighbor1@comcast.net> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
   Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:38:32 -0700> Subject: [CR]Comment on Cirque bik e classification: "original" v. "restored"> > To make judging easier for Ci rque bike classification: "original" vs.. > "restored" why not do this, h ave entries state which class they are > completing in. Than for original c lassification entries have owner on a > standard Cirque provided form list the original parts and frame. > Allowing for comments to be included. Than judge it using form checking > to see if it meets form after first reviewin g form for correctness. For > restored judge it is has it is right now.> Ju st a thought> > Charles Nighbor> Walnut Creek, CA> PS I always when enter ing a bicycle judging contest include a water > bottle with fresh flowers i n it. And match or contrast flower color to > bicycle color. Judges can't r esist giving a few more points.> > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MI ME parts ---> multipart/alternative> text/plain (text body -- kept)> text/h tml> ---> _______________________________________________> Classicrendezvou s mailing list> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> http://www.bikelist.org/mai lman/listinfo/classicrendezvous