The first coin - addenda

ustion (mark) wrote in message
Your article has no sources cited (including, most conspicuously, one for the
photo), ...

That is the second time you have mentioned this and I find it
interesting, also. The webpage in question is apparently headed for
print. If so, the editor there will insist on some attribution.
However, for here and now, the unattributed use of this excellent
picture does raise some issues. Mr. Goldsborough sells coins. He
participates in the numismatic markets as a writer. Therefore,
although this webpage might nominally be cited as an example of free
information, the fact is that this use of this illustration is an
example of theft.

"... writing off one of the more knowledgeable collectors and dealers
of ancient coins (Mr Berk) as just another commercial dealer..."

Harlan Berk is himself very knowledgeable, of course. More to the
point, it is well known that he has experts behind him, Curtis Clay
now and Cathy Lorber before him, and others before her, in ancients,
as he does in US (Tom Delorey) and so on in every area. So, writing
off HJB is also to write off those professionals in his business to
whom he looks for authoritative answers.

... dismissing a museum whose job it is to know and present history
....

On the other hand, museums are not necessarily more expert in
numismatics than we are. I have some experience with this, trying to
have a chat with an ancient artifact museum person: she knew pottery,
not coins. That said -- and we can go back and forth -- I agree with
you that in order to trump a museum, you have to show a hand that
beats theirs. In other words, you have to have facts, not claims.
Also, interestingly, it is sometimes, perhaps often, the case,
that a SMALL museum will have a true expert of the highest caliber who
builds a special presentation. Reasons for this include job markets
and funding. So again, to downplay a museum requires more than a
sneer.

On 25 Jul 2003 04:00:39 -0700, (High Plains
Writer) wrote:

the fact is that this use of this illustration is an
example of theft.

Instead of diving into the gutter as some others do here with
statements like this ("the fact is..."), why not take the high road?
I've made a case for why I think the Lydian Lion is the first true
coin. Make a case for another coin, and back it up.

--

Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

In , on 07/25/2003
at 10:38 AM, Reid Goldsborough said:

Get a clue. This is my coin, my photo, AS I SAID in a previous message
here. It is not an "example of theft." You read what some idiot writes, and
you swallow it whole, acting like an idiot yourself.

Send him $5 and a SASE and he'll share his "logic" with you, I'm sure.

(I wouldn't waste my own money

Nick

Reid wrote:

"I've made a case for why I think the Lydian Lion is the first true coin. Make
a case for another coin, and back it up."


Ah... Yet another instance of you toeing the line and reaffirming the
"established wisdom." You must have swallowed Herodotus hook, line and sinker.
I'll put my money on Strabon.

I can make a case for another coin.

Chew on that for a while.


Anka Z
Co-president of the once thriving, but now defunct, Tommy John Fan Club.
Go, Lake County Captains!

(Ankaaz) wrote:

Reid wrote:

"I've made a case for why I think the Lydian Lion is the first true coin.
Make
a case for another coin, and back it up."


Ah... Yet another instance of you toeing the line and reaffirming the
"established wisdom." You must have swallowed Herodotus hook, line and
sinker.
I'll put my money on Strabon.

I can make a case for another coin.

Chew on that for a while.

He's too busy getting a lesson on Medusa and other Gorgons in Moneta-L to chew.
;-)


++++++++++
Phil DeMayo - always here for my fellow Stooge
When bidding online always sit on your helmet
Just say NO to counterfeits

Phil DeMayo wrote:

(Ankaaz) wrote:

Reid wrote:

"I've made a case for why I think the Lydian Lion is the first true coin.
Make
a case for another coin, and back it up."


Ah... Yet another instance of you toeing the line and reaffirming the
"established wisdom." You must have swallowed Herodotus hook, line and
sinker.
I'll put my money on Strabon.

I can make a case for another coin.

Chew on that for a while.

He's too busy getting a lesson on Medusa and other Gorgons in Moneta-L to chew.
;-)

I'm disappointed at the defamatory responses from Reid, but hardly
surprised. For whatever reason, my responses to Ed and Reid have both
failed to appear on the site, I'll see if they make the Digest.

On the other hand, I have gotten some nice supportive private e-mail
messages from list members. ;-)

Alan
'has read more than one book'

Alan wrote:

"I'm disappointed at the defamatory responses from Reid, but hardly surprised.
For whatever reason, my responses to Ed and Reid have both failed to appear on
the site, I'll see if they make the Digest.

On the other hand, I have gotten some nice supportive private e-mail messages
from list members. ;-) "


After reading Phil's reply here, I went to Moneta and caught up with a number
of the posts, including Reid's diatribe against you. His callous response was
-so- unlike the genteel disputes that arise in that forum.

I'm happy to hear that you received support from the Moneta regulars. You
certainly deserved it.


Anka Z
Co-president of the once thriving, but now defunct, Tommy John Fan Club.
Go, Lake County Captains!

From: (High Plains Writer)

The date of 600 BC for "the first coin" and the "first coin" coming
from Croesus are two distinct problems.

Agreed. And all the more evidence that he doesn't get it.
--
mark

From: (High Plains Writer)

That is the second time you have mentioned this and I find it
interesting, also.

Given his history of sockpuppetry, given the critisism he has taken for using
others words, for not doing his own research, and for continued lack of siting
sources, you'd think he'd learn.

The webpage in question is apparently headed for
print. If so, the editor there will insist on some attribution.

If published in present form, I doubt the said editor would accept another
submission from him, once a few other things were pointed out.

However, for here and now, the unattributed use of this excellent
picture does raise some issues

He said it is a picture of his coin, which illustrates his cluelessness yet
again. He so doesn't get the necessity of attribution, he so doesn't respect
copyrights that he doesn't understand the very real, practical need to stick a
copyright statement on the picture.

On the other hand, museums are not necessarily more expert in
numismatics than we are.

They don't have to be, and that wasn't the point. Thinking so is playing into
his hands.

--
mark

Reid wrote:

"I don't see Alan William's messages here, and I hope not to see them in
Moneta-L either. What pathetic stuff. He starts a discussion there about coins
he doesn't collect and doesn't know a thing about -- and it's clear to everyone
who knows these coins he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about -- to try
to show that I'm wrong, in doing so totally misstating what I've said *here.* "


From Moneta-L's description: "Topics may include your collection, news and
events, requests for advice and attribution, historical discussion as related
to coins and more."

Based on the above and on the contents of his post, I'd say Alan has every
right to participate in the group. At least -he- knows what he's talking
about.

Your blasting him like that was a sucker punch. And you call -his- actions
pathetic.



Anka Z
Co-president of the once thriving, but now defunct, Tommy John Fan Club.
Go, Lake County Captains!