physics-fan3.14

I noticed your new avatar first on another thread and my first thought was "Wow... that's a striking and impressive design." I like it.

It appears to be in an NGC holder. What did they say?

Oh, yup, you're right. Simpson sale, not Partrick. Still, a headlining set that got crossed over.

Heritage just announced that many of the Partrick coins were crossed and regraded at PCGS - before the sale. They said to disregard the paper catalogue and only use the online catalogue, which has the updated grades. I'm curious how many were crossed, why, and how the grades changed.

Oh, yeah, I definitely remember that guy. Round and round and round... made my head spin.

Here's what I see:1. The reeding is shallow, but very crisp. The bottom rim is razor sharp square.-> hypothesis: this coin is a gift shop type piece made for sale as an imitation, and if we saw the face of the coin would be quickly obvious it is not genuine.2. The reeding is not uniform, widely spaced, and irregular. There are "blobs" in places, and there are vertical lines which look like file-marks or some sort of shear.-> hypothesis: this looks like the distortion I've seen on coins with added mintmarks. The counterfeiter will drill a hole into the edge of the coin, emboss a mintmark, and then fill and repair the edge. This looks like a bad repair-job.3. The reeding is very wide, and very widely spaced. There is some rim damage at the top.-> hypothesis: this is a machine struck counterfeit where they got the edge/reeding wrong. This type of reeding does appear on some foreign coins, but not US (that I'm aware of).4. The reeding is crisp, although there are some irregularities in the width. There is also what appears to be some overlap.-> hypothesis: this is a Morgan dollar with overlapping reeding (I think someone else mentioned this earlier.) See below for another example: 5. The reeds are quite narrow and widely spaced. They seem to be thicker at the valley vs the peak. They appear to taper towards the rim. The rim appears bevelled, not round or crisp. -> hypothesis: I'll admit, I'm stumped by this one - but I don't think its genuine. 6. There is a prominent casting seam through the middle. There are casting bubbles evident throughout. The segments of reeding (top and bottom) do not align.-> hypothesis: this is a cast counterfeit

Those who post on the NGC forum are more likely to purchase NGC coins. NGC coins are not accepted on the other registry. Thus, they are not likely to participate in the other registry, where their coins are not allowed. No surprise at all. Its deceptive to say that NCS *now* accepts PCGS US coins. They always used to. Someone high up in the company made a stupid decision several years ago to exclude PCGS coins, and after a few years of negative feedback finally recognized their mistake. The better way to phrase it is "The NGC Registry accepts PCGS coins again after a misguided interruption." There are plenty of members here who are also members ATS, and many of them even use the same username.

You know, it isn't the mint. I'm sure the mint would rather not do this. It's a whole lot more work for them. They are being instructed to do this by Congress. The mint has no choice, they have to do what the Congress tells them to. The Congress told them to do 50 States, they told them to do ATB, they told them to do Presidential dollars, they told them to do American Innovation Dollars.The mint has to do what they are told. Seriously, does anyone here actually care about any of these series? I'm sure the percentages are extremely low!

Wow. I really didn't realize that 2021 (next year) was the last year. I haven't followed the series.... and I have honestly had absolutely zero interest in the series. I hope they don't decide to do another series. I hope they stop all these silly "50" series. I couldn't tell you what most of the States coins are, and I absolutely couldn't tell you what the ATB series are at all (except for SC). I guess there's a dollar series too? Why? Just kill them all. One *well designed* obverse and one *well designed* reverse...... and no dead people. Is that too much to ask?

No, I have not ignored you on CoinTalk or on this forum. I disagree with you sometimes, but nowhere near the level of ignoring. Ignoring is for Trolls. You are not a Troll. VKB is a Troll. And I agree - any forum where Insider posts is improved by his posting. Not everybody likes him. That's ok. I think it is very telling how differently his threads have performed on this forum versus CoinTalk.

Yes, I always check all 4. If I'm going to ignore them, then I'm going to do my best to completely remove them from my existence. In the words of Pharaoh Sethi in the Ten Commandments: Their name shall be stricken from every book and tablet. Stricken from every pylon and obelisk of the internet. Let the name of the ignored be unheard and unspoken, erased from the memory of man, for all time. I'll tolerate someone for a long time. The "ignore" actions I described above are quite severe. Sometimes I'll put a time limit on it in hopes someone will change (on CoinTalk, I've ignored people for 6 months and then restored them... usually that's a mistake). I don't ignore a whole lot of people, but when I do, I don't regret it. I'll admit, I'm more likely to ignore somebody than many people are - but I think more people should ignore certain people. When I do ignore someone, I also publicly announce it. My hopes are that people will join me in ignoring them. When I put someone on ignore, its because they've exhibited destructive or disruptive behavior. They are trolls. Don't feed the trolls. When I see people feeding the trolls, it makes me sad because we could all just fix the problem by ignoring them! Honestly, I've ignored far more people on the NGC forums than on CoinTalk. NGC moderators don't moderate, they simply let the boards self destruct. I have to ignore people here or else I'd just leave, like so many others have. For example, on CoinTalk, I ignored VKurtB a long time ago, before he was banned there. When he re-surfaced here I had hoped he'd changed. I gave him a chance. He didn't change. And so now I've ignored him permanently - and will do so on whatever website I may see him emerge on anytime in the future, instantly. I really don't expect he'll ever be banned here, to the permanent detriment of these forums. Eh, it's NGC's place to run.

I assumed you had ignored one of the people I recently ignored. They have both posted several times to this thread. If you aren't seeing that, then I'm not sure who you ignored.

I realize that you are being entirely sarcastic with your post. However, I have long advocated for an informative breakdown of the grade (maybe on a 5 point scale). Give an individual score for Strike, Luster, Eye Appeal, and Contact Marks. During Guess the Grades over on CoinTalk, this is usually how I respond to the posts. (I'm actually not opposed to giving 2 scores, one for obverse and one for reverse - they are different sides, and often have different appearances). Sure, this would add complexity to any pricing model - but it would be far more useful in describing the coin than just saying "MS-63." NGC already does something like this with Ancient grading, giving a score on a 5 point scale for Strike and Surfaces (and then an overall descriptor score for wear, such as F or VF). I'm advocating for expanding that model.

For some of them, yes. Some of them were pushed by marketers who have undue influence over the TPGs. For example, dimes had been collected by torch lines for a long time before the TPGs added it. Franklin collectors actually focused more on a legible "Pass & Stow" on the bell than on bell lines, but Rick Tomaska convinced them to designate FBL. There are some other series which already are collected by strike designations, but which aren't recognized by TPGs. Two prominent examples are Walkers with Full Thumb and SBAs with Full Talons. I understand why many people don't care for strike designations (and that's ok), but I personally am a fan of them. I understand why many people wouldn't want more of them, but in my opinion if a series is already collected that way, then adding a new strike designation at the TPG isn't going to fundamentally change the way the series is collected - but it will make it easier or more accessible. The counterpoint is, of course, that knowledgeable collectors are currently able to "cherrypick" the premium coins, and that will be harder if the TPG starts designating it. An idea I've tossed about for awhile is a generic "Full Strike" designation that would apply to any coin.

You should congratulate QA as well

No, I am not referring to you.

Since this thread is about ignoring people - not everyone might know how to do that. You might want to do that to some people. Here's how: 1. On a post of theirs, hover over their username. 2. A box will pop up with three options at the bottom: Message / Ignore / Find Content. 3. Click Ignore. 4. You'll be taken to a new screen with a menu "Add new user to ignore list." You should see that users name in blue, and below is a selection of what you want to ignore: Posts, Messages, Signature, Mentions. Select the options you want to ignore (I usually select all 4). 5. After you've made your selection, click the green button "Update Preferences." 6. The newly ignored member will be added to the blue list "Users Currently Being Ignored." 7. Go, and live in peace, knowing that you won't be bothered by that member any more. (bonus round: when an ignored poster posts in a thread you will see a light grey notice which says something like: "You've chosen to ignore content by VKurtB. Options" If you are consumed by morbid curiosity, you can click and it will show you that post. But, if you do that then why did you ignore them in the first place?)

Michael did have mental problems (I'm not just saying that - he admitted it). He doesn't post here anymore because he passed away a few years ago. I don't remember Bear, either he was before my time here or I've just blocked him from my memory.

I was hoping the rumoured upcoming ANA registry would be that third-party, impartial, more open registry. Unfortunately, it sounds like its just going to be a copy-paste port of the NGC registry.

For anyone curious as to what this thread could have been with active participation and a lack of trolls, check out how CoinTalk handled it: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/intermediate-quiz-what-caused-these-marks.366112/ The discussion did eventually evolve into a comparison of the two forums... but I think even that is a worthy discussion.

The advantage you have is that you don't play politics. Your standards and convictions have stayed constant over the decades. I respect that. Some don't. And some don't understand that. This objectivity and experience also means that you have a certain way of viewing things that may seem foreign or outdated to some. You have far more experience in authenticating than anyone else on these boards (or, probably any other board you've attended), and only one other professional grader regularly posts on the forums (as far as I know). I'm not sure everyone knows your Curriculum Vitae, but I think it is truly impressive. As far as I'm concerned, the forums should be far more concerned with learning what you know than questioning everything you say. (having attended your seminars at FUN, and interacted with you in person, I can say that you are truly one of the most knowledgeable numismatic professionals I've ever met). Guys - Insider is literally one of the most experienced numismatists you've ever had the chance to talk to. Why do you feel the need to submit him to the Inquisition rather than learning from what he has to say? If he says that fluorescent lights are good for him, why not try them out and see for yourself? If they don't work for you, explain why! If you've tried fluorescent lights, explain what you liked or didn't like. Don't just dismiss him out of hand for no apparent reason. Explain what works better for you and why. We've had dozens of nonsensical posts with circular logic chasing your tail to show Insider he's wrong because you don't like his style, or your ego is bigger than your pant size. I'll tell you what - I'll trust Insider's experience over many of your anecdotes any day of the week.

Sunlight, in my opinion, is one of the absolute worst light sources for examining coins. I'm not sure why it's being bandied about. The key to lighting when examining coins is *consistency.* It doesn't really matter what type of light you use: if that type of light works for you, and you understand how it interacts with a coin, and you are able to see the appropriate details and defects, then it is probably an adequate light source. However, if you are used to using fluorescent light and your eyes are trained for fluorescent light, and then you attempt to use incandescent, halogen, Ott, or whatever else type of light - your results will be different. Always use the same type of light, and don't change. I mean, if you want to really take it back I guess we could just use oil lamps like they did before electricity?

On CoinTalk, there are several members who are dealers. Honestly, they often have some of the best, most informative threads and posts. Even in it's Heyday several years ago, NGC never had many active dealer-members. There are a couple of dealers/professionals who post here still, however.

I just put that troll Quintus on ignore a few minutes ago, and the place is already fresher. Oh, and I put the troll VKB on ignore as well. I strongly recommend everyone else do the same, and then they can just chase each other's tails around in circles without bothering us.

No, this is not from proof dies. If you look closely at the globe, you'll notice that the proofs are of a different reverse design variety. My coin is unquestionably from a business strike type die.