New Method of Handling Tied Sets in the Coin Registry

[dena]

In the past, sets with the same score were ranked according to which set achieved the high score first. Feedback from Registry participants prompted us to rethink the method of ranking tied sets.

 

A change has been implemented so that the Registry system will first rank by score and in the case of a tie the system will determine which set has the highest percentage of coin images. If the score and percentage of images is equal between two sets, then the percentage of coin descriptions will be considered. In a case where score, images and user descriptions are equal the system will then sort by the date the score was achieved. So to break it down, ranking is achieved by considering in this order:

 

1. Set score

2. Percentage of coins with images

3. Percentage of coins with descriptions

4. Date the score was achieved

 

We hope, through this change, to reward and encourage those who share their sets more fully by providing the pictures and personal descriptions that allow others to truly enjoy the sets, as well as to reduce the number of ties.

[CTcollector]

Nice job - a great idea !

 

Did you guys ever consider giving bonus points for images and descriptions ?

[Hoot]

This is a good and welcome change.

 

Hoot

[Oldtrader3]

I am glad to see this change.

[andold]

Well, I know I'm gonna stick my foot in it, but I'll speak my piece and then sit down and shut up.

 

Something about this new tie-breaker just doesn't seem right to me. Being "firstest with the mostest" isn't enough? It's not enough that I've reached a place in my collecting life where I have acquired some technical knowledge, developed a bit of an 'eye' for the subtle aesthetics of the hobby, and finally reached a place where I have the wherewithall to actually acquire some nice pieces - now I have to prepare an auction catalog as well?

 

I don't even own a camera (digital or otherwise), have no experience in coin photography (though I hope to develop some), and I am stuck in the stone ages of dial up. This site is slow enough to deal with at 50Kps, let alone trying to upload images.

 

It also seems somewhat arbitrary. Imagine a hypothetical 50-coin collection. Collector A and Collector B both have completed their sets and have the identical scores. Collector A has provided 50 detailed, knowledgeable descriptions of his set. Collector B has provided no descriptions, but has provided ONE photograh of her nicest piece. Which collector has done more to "share" their set with the community?

 

Collector C and Collector D are tied for second place by score. Neither has linked any photos, but Collector C has provided nice descriptions of her 5 - 10 best pieces. Collector D has descriptions for his entire set, but when you click through to read the details, you find all he has done is type in the grade of each piece. Again, which collector has done more to "share" their set with the community?

 

And, as an aside, it would seem that obscured sets wouldn't be ranked at all - they are sharing nothing with the group other than the fact they have a collection.

 

Well, that's what I think - you mileage may vary.

[Architecht]

The obscured sets issue is difficult to handle as their are legitimate reasons to want to obscure your set that are not driven simply by a desire to "not share".

 

 

On the coin descriptions versus pictures, that was a tough one.

 

In the end, we needed an automated system to moderate those ties. Generally speaking, people always enjoy seeing pics of the coins and images in sets seem to draw the most attention, so we gave that the edge. While I agree that a masterful description of the coin would potentially be even better than just a few pictures, the problem is that we didn't want to have people trying to give themselves an edge by simply including coin descriptions like "Hi!" and "This is a coin description!"

 

Ultimately, we felt that if you went to the trouble to post images, you would also probably post at least sincere coin descriptions. This system is not perfect. There are certainly ways to exploit the registry if you have the time and inclination, but it seems to be a good system and one which we hope will help everyone to enjoy everyone else's sets that much more.

[lm5403-migration]

I was wondering what moved me from 4th to 3rd. Thanks!

[TomB]

This is much more arbitrary, but how about in those rare cases of a tie for first place we have an NGC representative review the information publicly provided for each set and choose the set that does the most to educate the numismatic community?