Just Bob

The town I live in issued two of those flats back in 1936 to mark the cities Centennial, 5 cent denomination one red, one green.  I have one of them still hoping to find the other some day.  1936 makes them some of the earliest wooden flats.

I've had some 'flat' wooden nickels in the past also. Not this series though.
 

Those are pretty cool!

Very cool!

In the past,I have posted pictures of a bill-style wooden nickel from the 1941 Clarksdale, MS DeSoto celebration that I purchased several years ago. Tonight, I was looking at exonumia on the 'bay, and found an auction for some more of those, but different denominations. With just over 11 minutes left in the auction, I quickly put it a bid, then sat and watched until it ended. I won.
Seller's pics:
 

I feel like I need to apologize to Mr. Burdette.
When I first read the above mentioned Coin World articles, in late 2010, the 1933 Double Eagle case was getting publicity in the coin press and was being discussed on this forum. I sent him a PM, asking him if the Langbords had contacted him, since he obviously had lots of information that would be useful to their case. I had no idea that he had already become involved in the case, and I am sure he must have thought that either I was a spy for the other side, or, at the very least, extremely ignorant. He was, however, very gracious, and simply replied that he could not comment.
So, Mr. Burdette, I hope you can forgive the overzealousness of this country boy.
 

Not necessarily. There were over 10.7 billion small date cents (that is both metals types combined), minted in Philadelphia [no-mint mark cents were also minted in West Point and San Fransisco,and are included in this number, but that is irrelevant for for this discussion] that year, and neither type is scarce. The die crack is the only thing that might raise the value over face.

That same mint mark punch was used from 1974 to 1979. The punch had a defect in the upper inside curve. It also had slight doubling in the upper serif. By 1976, it was starting to show wear. (Remember, at this time the mint mark was still being punched into each working die.) By 1979, the mint mark was just a blob that vaguely resembled an "S."

What you described is one of the forms of strike/machine/mechanical damage, according to what I have read.

Ditto.I have no idea what happened, and unless I did something wrong, I don't need to know. Just glad to have you back.
I have heard nothing from Tom since he left last July.

You can send them a private message by hovering over or clicking their avatar, and selecting "message."

So, you are calling Matt G a liar?

You are going to get the obvious posts relating to coins shows: "Who is going to the (fill in the blank) show? or "Here is my new pickup from the latest show." And, then there are the Penny Lady's threads with lots of pictures, which are apparently created for ATS, but are also posted over here. So, yes, these threads and posts are coin show driven.
However, since I came back to this forum about two years ago, the number of older posters has dropped off substantially. (it is nice to see some of the old timers drop back in occasionally, though) And if you compare things to when I joined in 2009, it really lives up to its "Sleepy Hollow" nickname. I sometimes go back and read old threads, and am amazed at the number of posters who responded.
So, why is there less traffic now?I think some posters are turned off by the lack of informative posts here, and the prevalence of "Is this a valuable error/variety?" type posts, which seem to be the result of numerous Youtube videos and other sources of misinformation about what makes a coin valuable. Others are still holding a grudge against NGC for changing its policy on accepting PCGS coins in the registry, and, evidently, feel that not participating in the forum somehow "punishes" the company for its mistake. (I haven't figured that one out, yet. Why take out your frustrations with the company on the members of this forum? None of us had any say-so in that decision.) And some may have had issues with the format change a few years back, and decided to try a different forum. And, I am sure there are lots of other reasons, as well.
Although I do browse other forums, this is the only one on which I post. Unless I get lots more time on my hands, it will probably stay that way.
Those are my thoughts on the subject.

And now that you have heard it directly from the source, you can go back and correct the misinformation. 

That is Machine Doubling.
Here is a explanation with a photo I borrowed from the CCF that might help explain the difference. Note on yours how the secondary  image is lower and the devices are thinner. A sure sign of MD.
Machine Doubling
1. Always cuts away at the normal thickness of the devices affected. This in effect makes the device that stands out in relief thinner than it should be.
2. Has a step-down appearance to the 'doubling' which lacks character, boldness, and thickness.
3. Never shows 'notching' at the corners of the devices because the original die used to create them does not have this notching.

Hub Doubling
1. Always has extra thickness to some degree - in other words, the doubling never robs from the normal devices to cause the doubling.
2. In many cases 'notching' shows at the corners of the devices where the overlap in hubbing occurred. Just look at the picture, find 'notching', and this statement will be very clear.
3. Hub doubling actually creates a secondary 'set' of devices, which is apparent when looking at the doubling. It has relief - character. Machine Doubling only flattens parts of the only set of devices that exist, because there was no doubling in the die that created the coin.
 

An email or phone call to NGC would probably connect you with someone who would help walk you through the process or answer any questions you might have.

And now that you have heard it directly from the source, you can go back and correct the misinformation. 

I don't even know what to say about that awful looking thing.

I don't even know what to say about that awful looking thing.

And now that you have heard it directly from the source, you can go back and correct the misinformation. 

I think this is the only coin I have with just green toning on it:
 

Diameter in mm and weight in grams will be necessary to narrow it down, but the bust appears to be Postumus, Roman emperor from AD 258-276, (according to another source, 259-269) and the reverse looks like Felicitas (Roman goddess of luck?) holding a long caduceus and cornucopia. That should give you enough information to do some searching.
Given the proper info and plenty of time, someone who is really good at identifying these, like forum member JKK, could probably narrow it down much more  than my quick search did.

If you look at an example of an actual coin, you will see that the shield on this piece is not accurate, and the Latin "motto" on this coin was never used on any Confederate coin.

Welcome to the forum. 
I second what JKK said. 
Nice first post.