Dear fellow forumites, I have been lurking on this site for years. And I was initially appalled by the Cambodian beads post.

But, I could have done this differently and now I wish I had. I really did believe that it would be transparent to most bead collectors that the Funan attributions were doubtful. And I should have remembered that most collectors here are mainly knowledgeable concerning Venetian glass trade beads.

Nevertheless, as Will said: "A very mixed bag...Some of the beads, such as the recent copies of zi beads, are, as others have pointed out, clearly not ancient, nor did they have anything to do with Angkor Borei. You only undervalue the other items by including them. Some of the agates and carnelians look to be recent Chinese production….The silver coins… The square "gold" appliqués look very doubtful to me because of their Buddhist iconography. Are the ones that you show actually high-grade gold? (they don't look like it)…The intaglio seals…"and so forth.

Will was kind in letting this collector down gently. And I have much to learn from Will's educational and gentlemanly approach. If I had trusted the sincerity of the collector, I would have proceeded differently. Now, I wish I had trusted that this was not the typical ruse -as we often see perpetuated on eBay.

For this mistrust and misunderstanding, I am truly sorry. More importantly, I should have been more ladylike.

In any case, don't worry. You will NEVER hear from me again.