Significance of NH when describing a used stamp

I imagine that what they are really saying when describing a used stamp as "NH" is that the stamp's reverse shows no sign of either hinge residue or remnants.

If I were to describe such a stamp, I might just say that "the back is clean." If I was showing an image of the back, I wouldn't say anything at all.

Bobby,

I was looking at some auction stamps on 'another' forum just yesterday and the seller described his used stamps as NH. Which in that context suggests to me that they had 'no hinge'; or in other words the hinges had either been removed or never had hinges attached. Either way this is of no consequence to me.

Here in the UK, the term NH for used stamps is virtually never used and seems to have emanated from across the pond. I just find the use of NH an unnecessary distraction because it seems to mean something different to different people.

Perhaps someone could explain what the obsession is with hinges on used stamps anyway as this has always puzzled me; particularly on low value stamps. Is this some relatively new fashion or fad which has gathered momentum?

I would accept that there are exceptions in instances where a used stamp has a hinge that might be disguising a fault. But then again more often it is the gum remainder and foxing (rust) that could have more of an adverse effect. In that instance I would want that to actually be mentioned in the description and ideally accompanied with a scan.

Just my 0.01534 pence worth (at current exchange rate).

I dislike having more than one hinge on the back of a used stamp as a build-up can prevent the stamp from lying flat in my album.

For the most part, I'll soak all used stamps that I receive to remove the debris that may have accompanied them.

From an old listing I saved:




You know, I hadn't realised how versatile a $1000 stamp could be. You can write down all the wallpaper hanging calculations AND wipe up that coffee stain too.

PS.

I've just realised I'm derailing this thread, from 'Significance of NH.....' Oh dear!

Well, thank you for my 'fact of the day'; I never knowed that. I had assumed collectors soaked CTO's to remove the gum.  

I started this thread because I was genuinely curious about whether I was missing some cues regarding the use of NH vis a vis used stamps, and it seems I wasn’t. I am not trying to police language usage on the internet (Wow, what a full time job that would be!). From the discussion generated by my initial post, I gather that it is generally agreed that it is up to the individual to read and filter a seller’s affirmations as they relate to the individual buyer’s needs, requirements and interests. That a person uses descriptors such as NH, NG, mint, et alia, incorrectly can usually be ignored as long as one is confident that the seller’s philatelic competence is not subject to dispute. I place bids on many sellers’ items where the description is technically incorrect because I trust that particular seller’s overall competence and feel I can overlook his/her poor choice of such nomenclature.