How old is counterfeiting of coins?

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:43:38 +1100, "Jeff R"
wrote:

Sigh.

You're another one with a real life. Nutcase.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

Reid Goldsborough wrote:

On 10 Nov 2005 13:17:11 -0800, "Phil DeMayo" wrote:

I'll ask you again....does the real Alex "Jay" Berman, a writer from
Philadelphia who posted to the same writer's newsgroup to which you
used to post, know that you used his name in such a manner?

I don't know who this person is, never knew him, don't know him now.
This was a common-sounding name I pulled out of a virtual hat

Oh really?

Through 1998, encompassing your time in misc.writing, Alex Jay Berman
made over 800 posts to that newsgroup. The two of you mutually
participated in a number of threads and, on at least one occasion, you
replied directly to Mr. Berman.

But you have no recollection of that...uh-huh.

I hope you'll understand if I choose not to believe you.

On 11 Nov 2005 10:41:44 -0800, "Phil DeMayo" wrote:


Through 1998, encompassing your time in misc.writing, Alex Jay Berman
made over 800 posts to that newsgroup. The two of you mutually
participated in a number of threads and, on at least one occasion, you
replied directly to Mr. Berman.

But you have no recollection of that...uh-huh.

This was eight years ago, four years before this episode. I've
conversed with hundreds and hundreds of people online about various
topics. Maybe his name stuck in my head subconsciously. Did I use the
name Alex Jay Berman or Alex Berman or Jay Berman? I don't remember. I
don't believe I used the name Alex Jay Berman. Most important,
whatever name I used wasn't some conscious decision to post as if I
were him, same as my using the two other names wasn't some conscious
decision to post as some other real person.

You're continuing to do your weaseling picayune needling
pseudo-criticism. And you continue to show yourself to be an obsessed
Internet shut-in loser to be poring over posts of mine from a decade
ago. How much time do you spend with this junk?

And you didn't answer my question about your hypocrisy. What a
surprise. But I'll ask it again. You never know. Have you ever broken
the law? You preach to others about this.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 20:43:38 +1100, "Jeff R"
wrote:

Sigh.

You're another one with a real life. Nutcase.


I have a *great* life, thanks Reid.
Karma, you know.

When are you going to apologise for the depths of vulgarity and
misinformation that you have inflicted on this newsgroup?

--
Jeff R.
(Oh... and *thanks* for addressing the issue again... not.)

In , on 11/11/2005
at 04:31 PM, Reid Goldsborough said:

This was eight years ago, four years before this episode.

Not only a legal expert, but now a super-sleuth detective, too! Brother.

I hope Phil never looks in a phone book. Of the 153 John Smiths listed, 152
of them just have to be pretending to be the real one!

.... as if there is anything in the name under which one chooses to post.

Who is this "nospam" guy I see all over the place, anyway? (not meant to
pick on the fellow who uses it here; it's just that it's a "popular"
non-name). And who's the real one?

As I often do when getting a glimpse of a Phil post ... I'll simple
summarize with "duh".

Nick Knight
- Apparently a well-known Photographer - but it's my real name too!!

Phil DeMayo wrote:

Reid Goldsborough wrote:

Using a sockpuppet has long been considerable justified online when
people are discussing sensitive subjects. There are many examples....

Would one justifiable example be to ape the name of a real person to
make potentially damaging statements to a poster who shows up here
claiming to be a lawyer and threatens to sue?

I'll ask you again....does the real Alex "Jay" Berman, a writer from
Philadelphia who posted to the same writer's newsgroup to which you
used to post, know that you used his name in such a manner?

A followup question...what was the 'sensitive subject' involved when
Reid used a sockpuppet to praise his own recently published puff piece?
Isn't that tantamount to writing your own blurb? I no longer believe
Reid went to Temple. I now believe he founded the Jayson Blair School
of Journalism.

Alan
'all the news that we can create'

Alan Williams wrote:
Phil DeMayo wrote:

Reid Goldsborough wrote:

Using a sockpuppet has long been considerable justified online when
people are discussing sensitive subjects. There are many examples....

Would one justifiable example be to ape the name of a real person to
make potentially damaging statements to a poster who shows up here
claiming to be a lawyer and threatens to sue?

I'll ask you again....does the real Alex "Jay" Berman, a writer from
Philadelphia who posted to the same writer's newsgroup to which you
used to post, know that you used his name in such a manner?

A followup question...what was the 'sensitive subject' involved when
Reid used a sockpuppet to praise his own recently published puff piece?
Isn't that tantamount to writing your own blurb? I no longer believe
Reid went to Temple. I now believe he founded the Jayson Blair School
of Journalism.

Alan
'all the news that we can create'

C'mon Alan....you must know there are two separate but justifiable
classes of "pseudonuyms"....one to counter a "campaign of lies" and one
to use for "sensitive subjects". Your example falls into the first
class.

One of the funniest things about that episode was that he had his
sockpuppet congratulate himself for an article in the wrong magazine so
that he could correct himself.

I was shocked when he used his own name to announce his numismatic
literary guild award.

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:26:15 -0500, "Nick Knight"
wrote:

Not only a legal expert, but now a super-sleuth detective, too! Brother.

I hope Phil never looks in a phone book. Of the 153 John Smiths listed, 152
of them just have to be pretending to be the real one!

If you look in the dictionary, any dictionary, after the word loser,
as one of the examples you'll invariably see the name Phil DeMayo.
Same with the word liar. Look in any dictionary, and you'll see the
name Alan Williams. If you pick up any dictionary and look up the word
dummy, you'll see Jeff R.'s name, aka A.Gent, aka StillCranky. If you
look in any dictionary for the word sleazebag, you'll see Jorg Lueke's
name. Every single one. It's pretty funny actually.

Who is this "nospam" guy I see all over the place, anyway? (not meant to
pick on the fellow who uses it here; it's just that it's a "popular"
non-name). And who's the real one?

When Jorg Lueke tries to disrupt conversations here with his fake name
Reid Trollsborough, he uses the fake email address .
The nospam part though is no doubt part many munged email addresses,
with others also using it so as not to have their real email address
spam harvested.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:26:15 -0500, "Nick Knight"
wrote:

Not only a legal expert, but now a super-sleuth detective, too! Brother.

I hope Phil never looks in a phone book. Of the 153 John Smiths listed,
152
of them just have to be pretending to be the real one!

If you look in the dictionary, any dictionary, after the word loser,
as one of the examples you'll invariably see the name Phil DeMayo.
Same with the word liar. Look in any dictionary, and you'll see the
name Alan Williams. If you pick up any dictionary and look up the word
dummy, you'll see Jeff R.'s name, aka A.Gent, aka StillCranky. If you
look in any dictionary for the word sleazebag, you'll see Jorg Lueke's
name. Every single one. It's pretty funny actually.

Who is this "nospam" guy I see all over the place, anyway? (not meant to
pick on the fellow who uses it here; it's just that it's a "popular"
non-name). And who's the real one?

When Jorg Lueke tries to disrupt conversations here with his fake name
Reid Trollsborough, he uses the fake email address .
The nospam part though is no doubt part many munged email addresses,
with others also using it so as not to have their real email address
spam harvested.

--

Email:
Consumer:
Connoisseur:
Counterfeit:

Please excuse this post.
Its just so extraordinarily fatuous that its requires archiving - safe from
future deletion.

Cheers, all.
--
Jeff R.

(If anyone is still discussing the topic ... )

Coins are relatively recent inventions. For thousands of years before
the first coins, civilized people relied on fiduciary instruments in
clay. Generally _not_ traded in third-party transactions, these were
only promises to pay that were discarded when they served their
purpose.

1. See he

ACCOUNTING WITH TOKENS IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST
by Denise Schmandt-Besserat
Small clay tokens of multiple shapes found in Near Eastern sites
of 8000-3000 B.C. constitute the earliest evidence for accounting. ...
The tokens had two main functions: they served as counters to calculate
quantities of goods; they were mnemonic devices used to store data. In
this paper I will discuss this latter function: 1. How accounting was
practiced with tokens, and 2. how accounting was related to
sociopolitical changes ...
http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/lrc.../dsb/dsb1.html

2. This development parallels another, perhaps more fundamental. It
was in these newly complex societies that the "bicameral" mind of
earlier people began to break down. See he

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
(1976, 1990, 2000), by Julian Jaynes.
"When Julian Jaynes...speculates that until late in the second
millennium B.C. men had no consciousness but were automatically obeying
the voices of gods, we are astounded but compelled to follow this
remarkable thesis through all the corroborative evidence..."
http://www.julianjaynes.org/

2.b. And see he

Jaynes theorized that a shift from bicameralism marked the beginning of
introspection and consciousness as we know it today...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameral_mind

Among the many facts that Jaynes arrays is a distinction between the
Illiad and the Odyssey in ascribing motivation. In the Illiad, men
talk of being told by gods to do things. However, Odysseus has his own
(hidden) agenda: he lies. To Jaynes, lying was physically impossible
before the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Therefore, we can expect
that deceit -- "counterfeiting" -- began with the first organized
cities and is necessarily as old as counting and commerce.