I just figured out why some members post so much? 2 2

[Insider]

15 hours ago, Alex in PA. said:

"so they ask and then ridicule the person answering because they don't think he knows anything." 

This is where I agree with bsshog40.  While we should exercise a limit of patience where new people are concerned there is no reason, no excuse, for anyone on this forum to have to put up with ridicule or insolent behavior.

Here is a suggestion:  Many forums, much larger than this or the one ATS, have 'Volunteer Moderators'.  There are many here who would make a good moderator and then we would police our own behavior.  This is just a suggestion.

Thanks for your discussions.

Volunteer Moderators defined: Weak-bellied, snowflake, do-good control freaks who have nothing better to do than "report" things that may offend 1% of the other members.  I call them Mrs. Gruno's.  She was the nosy, no life, old witch on our block reporting anything to our parents.  

[VKurtB]

41 minutes ago, Insider said:

Volunteer Moderators defined: Weak-bellied, snowflake, do-good control freaks who have nothing better to do than "report" things that may offend 1% of the other members.  I call them Mrs. Gruno's.  She was the nosy, no life, old witch on our block reporting anything to our parents.  

+1,000,000! Why make this wonderful place more like that "poopy show" over at CoinTalk?

[80s Kid]

I was looking for a discussion related to Barber Half Dollars and came across this entire thread. I've been coin collecting for less than two years and have used this site for less than a year; visiting once or twice a week approx. A few thoughts: 

1. The NGC Chat Boards/Forums should be accessible from the NGC Home Page as a main topic. Many comments talk about a lack of activity. For someone who hasn't used this site as often, the fact that I have to navigating to the "Resources" menu first does not help. In addition, the Resources menu has "Chat Boards" near the bottom and it can be hidden depending on how your page is viewed (cropped off bottom of screen). 

2. The topics are too broad. I could be wrong but coin collecting/numismatics as a hobby would seem to be more about "specialization" in that collectors typically focus on specific areas. It would be helpful to break out U.S. Coins as a completely separate category with subtopics devoted to denominations and/or individual series. For example: 

-I recently purchased an 1897-S Barber Half Dollar graded MS63 PL and was curious about what other people thought about the "PL" designation for Barber Halves and if the coin appears to be properly graded (this is the only coin I've uploaded so far). I went back and forth on whether to buy the coin and ultimately took the plunge. Feel free to criticize if you think I went in over my head (as long as it's constructive). 

3. Consider allowing members to join specialized "groups" devoted to specific sets, coins, etc. (If this already exists, it should be more obvious). For example, my collecting is not relegated to a specific series. My focus is probably best described as "Key Dates" although I use this term loosely. I'd like to discuss this and get people's opinions on values, organization/display, budget, etc.

If there's one takeaway from this post, I'd say there should be more specialized topics for people to post. These topics can even be split between "newbie" and "veteran" if needed. I absolutely enjoy the hobby but the Chat Boards for this website come off as too vague with insufficient focus on obvious subcategories. These are my opinions and pushback or constructive criticism is fine as long as it's fair. 

Edited August 30, 2020 by 80s Kid
Coin photo added

[Insider]

On 8/29/2020 at 7:27 PM, 80s Kid said:

I

 

If NGC says it is PL it is.  Rev. looks Cameo.

[Conder101]

On 8/29/2020 at 7:27 PM, 80s Kid said:

2. The topics are too broad. I could be wrong but coin collecting/numismatics as a hobby would seem to be more about "specialization" in that collectors typically focus on specific areas. It would be helpful to break out U.S. Coins as a completely separate category with subtopics devoted to denominations and/or individual series

There used to be more categories, but with the low usage the different categories only had a few posts each so eventually the groups were consolidated into a smaller number of groups.

[jtryka]

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

[Henri Charriere]

1 hour ago, jtryka said:

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

Me neither, but the gentleman has been around awhile and apparently drops in from time to time to see how the Forum is coming along.  The truth is the Forum is only as good as its participating members at any given time.  I am sorry I cannot contribute to any discussion of his gorgeous barber half, but believe I am the only member with the guts to come right out and say that that 1794 coming up for auction shortly sports a series of unsightly (but curiously unmentioned) parallel lacerations on its obverse which ought to detract from any grade assigned to it as well as its unwarranted

 

1 hour ago, jtryka said:

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

comparison to a similar piece widely reported to have been sold for $10 million.  If I had the means, I would sooner acquire a true unblemished gem that speaks for itself without qualification.

[VKurtB]

1 hour ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Me neither, but the gentleman has been around awhile and apparently drops in from time to time to see how the Forum is coming along.  The truth is the Forum is only as good as its participating members at any given time.  I am sorry I cannot contribute to any discussion of his gorgeous barber half, but believe I am the only member with the guts to come right out and say that that 1794 coming up for auction shortly sports a series of unsightly (but curiously unmentioned) parallel lacerations on its obverse which ought to detract from any grade assigned to it as well as its unwarranted

 

comparison to a similar piece widely reported to have been sold for $10 million.  If I had the means, I would sooner acquire a true unblemished gem that speaks for itself without qualification.

I really don’t think you would. This one is widely considered the finest known. 

[Henri Charriere]

37 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

I really don’t think you would. This one is widely considered the finest known. 

Sorry to have to disappoint you but even trolls have values.  I am not going to purchase an original Rolls Royce Silver Ghost classic car from a recognized reputable authorized dealer or auction house with no mention made of the glaring key marks that had been gouged into its body by the previous owner's irate wife. NO SALE!!!

[VKurtB]

On ‎9‎/‎2‎/‎2020 at 1:54 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Sorry to have to disappoint you but even trolls have values.  I am not going to purchase an original Rolls Royce Silver Ghost classic car from a recognized reputable authorized dealer or auction house with no mention made of the glaring key marks that had been gouged into its body by the previous owner's irate wife. NO SALE!!!

I believe what you are looking at, if you are considering those marks between the 2 o'clock and 3 o'clock position, are planchet adjustment marks, and as the strict technical grading ideologue as you claim to be, are not to be considered at all, since they were there when the coin came off the dies, by way of a screw press. Orrrr… you could adopt market grading, at which time the state of the planchet becomes relevant. A conundrum for you, to be sure.

Edited September 4, 2020 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

This is the text from the page "across the street" on this coin. The red text shows my emphasis.

 

1. The Neil/Carter example is in the exact die state as the copper die trial and is possibly the first silver dollar struck.
2. The coin is one of the few examples known that is struck from aligned dies, showing that it is almost certainly one of the first pieces struck.
3. The planchet was specially prepared. The term for this is "burnishing," and the planchet was polished with wet sand (the method of the time) prior to the coin being struck.
4. The coin is radically different from any other known example. Not only is the strike of the coin significantly superior to other known examples, it is also wholly prooflike, with full reflectivity in the fields on both sides.
5. The state of preservation of the coin shows that it was specially handled from the beginning. The coin was struck on October 15, 1794 and has been magnificently preserved since that day, having never been in a bag or seeing contact with other coins.
6. The adjustment marks do not preclude a Specimen striking. The planchet was overweight, it was adjusted (and over-adjusted), then it was plugged to increase the weight to the most precise degree available to the 18th-century coiners.
7. This is the only plugged-at-the-Mint example known to us. This was done prior to striking, of course. Mint plugs are frequently seen on the 1795 Flowing Hair dollars (and a few 1795 Flowing Hair half dollars), but not the 1794 issues, until now.

 

Now nobody, least of all I, can prevent you from believing the untrue things you choose to believe, but this is the same coin. In street cred lingo, "They ain't no bettah one."

Edited September 2, 2020 by VKurtB

[MarkFeld]

5 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Me neither, but the gentleman has been around awhile and apparently drops in from time to time to see how the Forum is coming along.  The truth is the Forum is only as good as its participating members at any given time.  I am sorry I cannot contribute to any discussion of his gorgeous barber half, but believe I am the only member with the guts to come right out and say that that 1794 coming up for auction shortly sports a series of unsightly (but curiously unmentioned) parallel lacerations on its obverse which ought to detract from any grade assigned to it as well as its unwarranted

 

comparison to a similar piece widely reported to have been sold for $10 million.  If I had the means, I would sooner acquire a true unblemished gem that speaks for itself without qualification.

The 1794 dollar coming up for auction isn’t a similar piece to the one that brought $10 million - it’s the same coin.

[VKurtB]

3 minutes ago, MarkFeld said:

The 1794 dollar coming up for auction isn’t a similar piece to the one that brought $10 million - it’s the same coin.

Yuppir, sure is! I suppose you have to actually be Quintus Arrius to not know this. But hey, he's a grammar school graduate from a New York City borough, and that's all he needs to be.

Edited September 2, 2020 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

Foiled again.  About my only saving grace is unlike the heavyweights on this Forum, yourself included, I have no good name, credibility,  credentials, reputation, or even plausibility left to lose. My rank amateur status remains intact.  (I was originally going to call those lacerations cat scratches but even tiger claws are not that strong. And, no, I would not bid on anything deserving of a better fate than a safe deposit box somewhere.) I appreciate the time and effort you put into formulating your response for me!

[VKurtB]

12 minutes ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Foiled again.  About my only saving grace is unlike the heavyweights on this Forum, yourself included, I have no good name, credibility,  credentials, reputation, or even plausibility left to lose. My rank amateur status remains intact.  (I was originally going to call those lacerations cat scratches but even tiger claws are not that strong. And, no, I would not bid on anything deserving of a better fate than a safe deposit box somewhere.) I appreciate the time and effort you put into formulating your response for me!

But hey, it's numismatics circa 2020, so the over/under betting line on the new price is [mumble, mumble, carry the 5, take the hypotenuse, mumble , mumble] $8.25 million. Why? Because everybody expects a discount, right?

[bsshog40]

12 hours ago, jtryka said:

Wow @bsshog40 I can't believe you have that many posts!

Yea I use to be a jabber jaw back in the day. Lol I haven't bought much in the line of coins in a while. Just been sticking to my proof sets, Jeffersons and Danscos lately. Mediocre stuff! Lol 

[Henri Charriere]

4 hours ago, VKurtB said:

$8.25 million. Why? Because everybody expects a discount, right?

Auctions are difficult to call.  And it only takes.one fanatic whose been waiting for this once-in-a-generation, or lifetime opportunity to skew the final result beyond all reason.  On direct sales, European purveyors of coins are amenable to your best offer, or standard 5% discount; U.S. dealers, are not citing the all sacred Fair Market Value. The only seller I really felt sorry for was the one whose name I failed to record who sold me a physically unimpressive raw coin at a price then barely above melt which I eventually sent in for routine grading only to discover there was only one other graded like it -- and none higher, a record that persists to this day.  (Other than the digit "4," there is nothing about the weakly struck, scarred for life, 1794 dollar that leaps out at the viewer and says, Hey, look at this!  At least, with the occasional discovery of hoards and shipwrecks, you get an interesting back story coupled with an objective grade.)

[VKurtB]

1 minute ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Auctions are difficult to call.  And it only takes.one fanatic whose been waiting for this once-in-a-generation, or lifetime opportunity to skew the final result beyond all reason.  On direct sales, European purveyors of coins are amenable to your best offer, or standard 5% discount; U.S. dealers, are not citing the all sacred Fair Market Value. The only seller I really felt sorry for was the one whose name I failed to record who sold me a physically unimpressive raw coin at a price then barely above melt which I eventually sent in for routine grading only to discover there was only one other graded like it -- and none higher, a record that persists to this day.  (Other than the digit "4," there is nothing about the weakly struck, scarred for life, 1794 dollar that leaps out at the viewer and says, Hey, look at this!  At least, with the occasional discovery of hoards and shipwrecks, you get an interesting back story coupled with an objective grade.)

Weakly struck? Seriously? Have you even read the descriptions? I think the back story on this 1794 dollar is about as good as any ever get.

[Henri Charriere]

12 minutes ago, VKurtB said:

Weakly struck? Seriously? Have you even read the descriptions? I think the back story on this 1794 dollar is about as good as any ever get.

To paraphrase that T-shirt slogan, I am not a gynecologist, but I will take another look.

[VKurtB]

1 minute ago, Quintus Arrius said:

To paraphrase that T-shirt slogan, I am not a gynecologist, but I will take another look.

Great. See item #4 from the quote I pulled from the PCGS site above. No 18th century coins have particularly deep relief. The burros could only pull the screw presses so tight. 

[MarkFeld]

7 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

Auctions are difficult to call.  And it only takes.one fanatic whose been waiting for this once-in-a-generation, or lifetime opportunity to skew the final result beyond all reason.  On direct sales, European purveyors of coins are amenable to your best offer, or standard 5% discount; U.S. dealers, are not citing the all sacred Fair Market Value. The only seller I really felt sorry for was the one whose name I failed to record who sold me a physically unimpressive raw coin at a price then barely above melt which I eventually sent in for routine grading only to discover there was only one other graded like it -- and none higher, a record that persists to this day.  (Other than the digit "4," there is nothing about the weakly struck, scarred for life, 1794 dollar that leaps out at the viewer and says, Hey, look at this!  At least, with the occasional discovery of hoards and shipwrecks, you get an interesting back story coupled with an objective grade.)

Shipwreck coins aren’t anymore objectively graded than any other coins. Some of your comments are baffling. 

[VKurtB]

4 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

Shipwreck coins aren’t anymore objectively graded than any other coins. Some of your comments are baffling. 

‘Baffling’ is about as generous and diplomatic a term as can be employed here.

[Henri Charriere]

3 hours ago, VKurtB said:

‘Baffling’ is about as generous and diplomatic a term as can be employed here.

I wish I had the time and inclination to wade through the 70-some-odd pages of NGC's enhanced images of the Partrick Collection to zero in on the poor excuse of a Pine Tree Shilling or whatever that severely defaced slug of a coin from the 1600's some grading finalizer chose to honor with an AU-58 designation.  Now that's not just baffling but downright laughable.  Even our own Ratzie, an authentic character in his own right, would not have the audacity to pull off a stunt like that!

[MarkFeld]

1 hour ago, Quintus Arrius said:

I wish I had the time and inclination to wade through the 70-some-odd pages of NGC's enhanced images of the Partrick Collection to zero in on the poor excuse of a Pine Tree Shilling or whatever that severely defaced slug of a coin from the 1600's some grading finalizer chose to honor with an AU-58 designation.  Now that's not just baffling but downright laughable.  Even our own Ratzie, an authentic character in his own right, would not have the audacity to pull off a stunt like that!

I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or if you're being serious. Regardless, first, AU58 is a grade, not a designation. And second, my guess is that you're not expert at grading colonials and have no business mocking the coin or its graders. But even if I'm wrong and you are expert, there are more civil ways to make your point. I think perhaps, you just covet attention, and I'm done responding to any of your posts.

Edited September 3, 2020 by MarkFeld

[VKurtB]

1 hour ago, MarkFeld said:

I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or if you're being serious. Regardless, first, AU58 is a grade, not a designation. And second, my guess is that you're not expert at grading colonials and have no business mocking the coin or its graders. But even if I'm wrong and you are expert, there are more civil ways to make your point. I think perhaps, you just covet attention, and I'm done responding to any of your posts.

Mark, take the least charitable ( to QA) interpretation of what he has to say, and why, and apply it, and I am more than certain it is applicable. The totality of his body of work (????) here stands as stark evidence. It’s utterly amazing how far some people can ride a little ignorance.

Edited September 3, 2020 by VKurtB

[Henri Charriere]

2 hours ago, MarkFeld said:

I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or if you're being serious. Regardless, first, AU58 is a grade, not a designation. And second, my guess is that you're not expert at grading colonials and have no business mocking the coin or its graders. But even if I'm wrong and you are expert, there are more civil ways to make your point. I think perhaps, you just covet attention, and I'm done responding to any of your posts.

If I were really smart I would take my cue from the OP -- who, being the consummate gentleman he undoubtedly is, once thundered one viewer's contribution was "the most ignorant opinion I've read this year." -- and start a thread entitled:  I JUST FIGURED OUT WHY SOME MEMBERS POST SO  LITTLE!  

But I get ahead of myself. Let's dissect this delicious stew, sha'n't we?

Forget the part at the end where MF picks up his marbles, runs and vows to refrain from ever responding to my posts again.  Where have we heard such idle boasts before?  Why, from none other than the King of the Paper Tigers himself lately of the Great Commonwealth of PA. (My ability to endear himself to me, once again, was nothing short of a stroke of masterful genius.)

Even more stunning, we have an acknowledged expert reduced here to unabashedly questioning the integrity of a self-described Troll!  Now how pathetic is that?  Am I, a confirmed rank amateur, seriously expected to dignify such pitifully uninformed indecisiveness with a cogent response?

Moving along, MF takes issue with my use of the word "designation" to refer to a "grade" thereby effectively, and likely unwittingly, engaging an  anachronism known as to "hoist with one's own petard."  Is there a collector anywhere who truly believes the grade assigned to an item coming up for auction from a renowned collection with an impeccable provenance is subject to debate?  MF elsewhere has hewed to the line that a grade is merely an opinion.  It follows that opinions can be mulled over, formulated , expressed, and even revised, right?

Nope! Not if that opinion fails to coincide with that of MF (and a supporting cast comprised of what another viewer once referred to opaquely as a "nefarious cabal.") And therein lies the rub. You are allowed to express your opinion, as long as it is in line with the party line.  This is reminiscent of a quote attributed to Henry Ford:  You can have any color [Ford Model T car] you want, as long as it's black.

Judging by MF's grossly disproportionate highly personal response to a simple recyclable observation, I am convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that his uncanny ability of zeroing in on the precise excuse for a coin I was alluding to -- buried within 70-plus pages of listings! -- suggests even a rookie examiner would have no problem finding his latents all over that slab.  I can only hope far better specimens don't show up to save him the embarrassment of a mandatory recall for reconsideration and the sight of me, a rank amateur (so designated by VKurtB) standing there saying, I told you so.

As Billy Batts told Tommy in Goodfellas, "...go home and get your shinebox."  You'll be back.  They all come back.  And the ones you think haven't, are on the sidelines watching. No one in their right mind wades in shark-infested waters.

Happy collecting, everybody!

[ldhair]

I'm not impressed with long fancy words. They don't cover up someone that is trying to act like they know what they are talking about.  

[bsshog40]

19 minutes ago, ldhair said:

I'm not impressed with long fancy words. They don't cover up someone that is trying to act like they know what they are talking about.  

I hear ya Larry! I've seen many people in my life that are soo intelligent but have no common sense at all. I have no prejudice with intelligent individuals, but most just show their ignorance thru conversation. 

[Henri Charriere]

Friends sticking up for friends.  Perfectly understandable.  So the Forum, the marketplace of ideas, falls into dysfunction because you have the major players. We will be generous and call them A, B, C, D and E. And independent thinkers comprised of the rest of the letters in the alphabet soup who are reluctant to speak out for fear of offending S who is aligned with M who happens to agree with one or two things J has spoken on -- all of whom are unable or unwilling to chime in with G because he is in tight with one of the major players. 

That is the primary reason why I must make it my duty to assume the position of Public Service Announcer and begin that thread, "I JUST FIGURED OUT WHY SOME MEMBERS POST SO  LITTLE!"  

I shall dedicate that thread to the young newbie who innocently admitting to dropping a coin on concrete to assess its ring -- and was promptly excoriated and eviscerated by not a few well-regarded members, and run out on a rail never to be seen or heard from again.  Nice work, gentlemen!

[VKurtB]

One guy's "independent thinker" is another guy's "misinformation spreader". It really is no more complicated than that. Let me 'splain sumpin' ta ya. All opinions are NOT equal, and what's more, they never have been, ever, in history. Ever. Did I say, "ever"? It's why the American Numismatic Association certifies exhibit judges. It's why courts certify expert witnesses. It's why 'regular folk' get legal counsel to jump up and yell "OBJECTION" when they offer an opinion on the stand.

Edited September 4, 2020 by VKurtB