rare-coin broker conned an elderly East Sider

"oly" wrote in message
...

....
It was not "red-penciled" because it accurately conveyed the mantra of the
liberal class - that gold and silver are bad. Evil.

oly

If that's the case, they're real slackers at it. At a minimum they should:

1. Boycott the Olympics until they replace the gold and silver medals with
recyclable materials.

2. Ban gold and silver in dental fillings and require that only materials
from renewable resources be used.

3. Require that all gold and silver coins, bullion, and jewelry be turned
in, in exchange for brass or aluminum copies, respectively.

4. Close all gold and silver commodity exchanges.

5. Delete all references to gold and silver from economics textbooks.

6. Tie the dollar to the price of lead.

7. Teachers shall be forbidden to award gold and silver star tickers.

8. Change the bromide "Every cloud has a silver lining" to "Every cloud has
an aluminum foil lining."

9. Replace the term "the gold standard of" with "the Leftmost of" when
describing the highest standard of anything.

and last but not least,

10. "Republican cockroach" be declared the new name for the insect formerly
known as a silverfish.

On Nov 12, 11:46*am, "mazorj" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message

...

...
It was not "red-penciled" because it accurately conveyed the mantra of the
liberal class - that gold and silver are bad. *Evil.

oly

If that's the case, they're real slackers at it. *At a minimum they should:

1. Boycott the Olympics until they replace the gold and silver medals with
recyclable materials.

2. Ban gold and silver in dental fillings and require that only materials
from renewable resources be used.

3. Require that all gold and silver coins, bullion, and jewelry be turned
in, in exchange for brass or aluminum copies, respectively.

4. Close all gold and silver commodity exchanges.

5. Delete all references to gold and silver from economics textbooks.

6. Tie the dollar to the price of lead.

7. Teachers shall be forbidden to award gold and silver star tickers.

8. Change the bromide "Every cloud has a silver lining" to "Every cloud has
an aluminum foil lining."

9. Replace the term "the gold standard of" with "the Leftmost of" when
describing the highest standard of anything.

and last but not least,

10. "Republican cockroach" be declared the new name for the insect formerly
known as a silverfish.

Most of those things have already happened, like #1 (in recent years,
the IOC gave out actual damn rocks instead of metallic medals); #2
(partial); #4 (at least in the USA - any serious metals trading takes
place in London or the far East, to avoid the interference and
constant rules changing of/by large U.S. Banks), #5 (you must have
gone to college before 1960 and your textbooks must have been rather
old even at that time); #6 (if the dollar were tied to any commodity,
even lead, it would be a major improvement over the present state of
affairs); #7 (teachers don't give out stickers for achievement anymore
because it's unfair to the 'tards - everybody gets a damn sticker or
nobody gets a damn sticker); #9 (I'm sure that it's already been
done); and finally #10 (I'm certain that you've quoted directly from
the Olberman dictionary).

oly

I've enjoyed reading your analysis of this. Incisive, genuinely
informed, and spot on. But has anyone else here seen the irony here?
Complaints are made about the ignorance and mistakes about numismatics
in the journalism world, yet such complaints show a clear lack of
knowledge about journalism, how it works.

It's not the error hunting itself that's wrong. I enjoy this myself, and
clearly there are benefits to pointing out factual mistakes when they're
disseminated publicly. It's just that, if you want to be correct
yourself, you should view mistake making in context. Experts will always
find mistakes when non-experts are writing about their field, and even
sometimes when experts are, regardless of the media. Good fact checking,
on the part of writers as well as editors, can go a long way to
minimizing it, but another reality is that thorough fact checking is
becoming a victim of both the hard times in the traditional media and
the boom times of Internet media.

But I got a chuckle too out of the statement in this article that
collectable gold coins are gilt, not solid gold. Maybe I should send
more of my coins out for spectroscopy, to make sure they're not plated.
Seriously, though, this can be an interesting exercise, for older as
well as newer coins, finding out exactly what their alloy is through
non-destructive metallurgical testing. Here too, however, there are
limitations.

--

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

On Nov 12, 12:50*pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
I've enjoyed reading your analysis of this. Incisive, genuinely
informed, and spot on. But has anyone else here seen the irony here?
Complaints are made about the ignorance and mistakes about numismatics
in the journalism world, yet such complaints show a clear lack of
knowledge about journalism, how it works.

It's not the error hunting itself that's wrong. I enjoy this myself, and
clearly there are benefits to pointing out factual mistakes when they're
disseminated publicly. It's just that, if you want to be correct
yourself, you should view mistake making in context. Experts will always
find mistakes when non-experts are writing about their field, and even
sometimes when experts are, regardless of the media. Good fact checking,
on the part of writers as well as editors, can go a long way to
minimizing it, but another reality is that thorough fact checking is
becoming a victim of both the hard times in the traditional media and
the boom times of Internet media.

But I got a chuckle too out of the statement in this article that
collectable gold coins are gilt, not solid gold. Maybe I should send
more of my coins out for spectroscopy, to make sure they're not plated.
Seriously, though, this can be an interesting exercise, for older as
well as newer coins, finding out exactly what their alloy is through
non-destructive metallurgical testing. Here too, however, there are
limitations.

--

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

Just like EVERYTHING ELSE, El Ream-o know ALL ABOUT JOURNALISM.

Why are we NOT surprised???

oly

On Nov 12, 1:13*pm, "Coin Forum" wrote:
You would think that someone who scammed that much $$$ could afford a
few dollars for some facial makeup.

Possibly some Botox, too? Nah. She's a Pelosi wannabe.

Jerry
Excuse me while I blow chunks.

On Nov 13, 9:14*am, Jerry Dennis wrote:
On Nov 12, 1:13*pm, "Coin Forum" wrote:

You would think that someone who scammed that much $$$ could afford a
few dollars for some facial makeup.

Possibly some Botox, too? *Nah. *She's a Pelosi wannabe.

Jerry
Excuse me while I blow chunks.

Ms. Pelosi is a second generation political operative. Knows how to
mis-whatever OPM in ways that are MOL "legal". One suspects that
Madame Speaker uses facial make-up too, if not really well.

oly

"oly" wrote in message news:5f4d9a2d-c718-40ac-abe9-
On Nov 12, 12:50 pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
... Experts will always
find mistakes when non-experts are writing about their field, and even
sometimes when experts are, regardless of the media. Good fact checking,
on the part of writers as well as editors, can go a long way to
minimizing it,


Just like EVERYTHING ELSE, El Ream-o know ALL ABOUT JOURNALISM.

Why are we NOT surprised???

oly

Oh, now, hangonaminnit, Oly.

You really should cut Reid a little slack here.
It's only fair to assume that he knows at least *a little* about journalism,
since he is part of the problem himself - having been published in the past.

(I've no idea what he's doing now - having seen anything original published
for ages - not that I'm looking...)

He's had a great deal of personal experience of journalists getting basic
facts wrong. He's well-qualified to opine about it. Even if only to offer
a group apology.

--
Jeff R.

On Nov 13, 4:28*pm, "Jeff R." wrote:
"oly" wrote in message news:5f4d9a2d-c718-40ac-abe9-

On Nov 12, 12:50 pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

... Experts will always
find mistakes when non-experts are writing about their field, and even
sometimes when experts are, regardless of the media. Good fact checking,
on the part of writers as well as editors, can go a long way to
minimizing it,
Just like EVERYTHING ELSE, El Ream-o know ALL ABOUT JOURNALISM.
Why are we NOT surprised???
oly

Oh, now, hangonaminnit, Oly.

You really should cut Reid a little slack here.
It's only fair to assume that he knows at least *a little* about journalism,
since he is part of the problem himself - having been published in the past.

(I've no idea what he's doing now - having seen anything original published
for ages - not that I'm looking...)

He's had a great deal of personal experience *of journalists getting basic
facts wrong. *He's well-qualified to opine about it. *Even if only to offer
a group apology.

--
Jeff R.

Sending a numismatic article off to a publication for an up or down
decision isn't at all the same as going to journalism school and then
working for several years in a newsroom.

Of course, popular opinion suggested that Reef was well known for
imitating Uncle Walter Breen - if he couldn't make the facts fit the
hypothesis of his articles, he twisted the facts or made them up
wholesale.

However, I must admit something is bugging me. Didn't Reeamo work for
Coin World for about three weeks until they let him go for cause
(incredibly poor personal hygene and other asinine habits)??? Or am I
thinking of someone else???

I know somebody out there, well-known to numismatic circles as a
visible collector, recently worked for Coin World for a very short
period of time. Very short.

oly

On 11/13/2010 8:27 PM, oly wrote:
Didn't Reeamo work for
Coin World for about three weeks until they let him go for cause
(incredibly poor personal hygene and other asinine habits)???

You and Jeff R. could win a Pulizer in a new category: Erroneous online
reporting about errors in reporting. Jeff R. says I had something
"published in the past" but that he hasn't seen anything recently though
he hasn't been looking. That's fine reporting -- very thorough and
responsible. You in turn have everything factually wrong about
everything you said in the above post. Maybe they'll let you split the
prize.

Even if not, it was really fun reading what you both wrote, both
stumbling badly in the very way I was commenting on, the irony of people
doing error hunting while being transparently wrong themselves and
without showing one iota's worth of diligence in trying to get the facts
correct. But this is entirely expected, with you two at any rate, in
that neither of you have shown any concern about getting the facts
straight, only about the flame, only about shouting louder than others,
you more than him, your personal agenda.

Vent on -- you obviously need it, day after day, week after week, year
after year, and what better place than this, where you can heap your
feeble, error-laden attempts at abuse on others, anonymously, not taking
any responsibility for your actions. Can't do that in a department,
school board, or any other meeting where you have to show you face and
own up to what you say.

--

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

On Nov 13, 8:44*pm, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
On 11/13/2010 8:27 PM, oly wrote:

Didn't Reeamo work for
Coin World for about three weeks until they let him go for cause
(incredibly poor personal hygene and other asinine habits)???

You and Jeff R. could win a Pulizer in a new category: Erroneous online
reporting about errors in reporting. Jeff R. says I had something
"published in the past" but that he hasn't seen anything recently though
he hasn't been looking. That's fine reporting -- very thorough and
responsible. You in turn have everything factually wrong about
everything you said in the above post. Maybe they'll let you split the
prize.

Even if not, it was really fun reading what you both wrote, both
stumbling badly in the very way I was commenting on, the irony of people
doing error hunting while being transparently wrong themselves and
without showing one iota's worth of diligence in trying to get the facts
correct. But this is entirely expected, with you two at any rate, in
that neither of you have shown any concern about getting the facts
straight, only about the flame, only about shouting louder than others,
you more than him, your personal agenda.

Vent on -- you obviously need it, day after day, week after week, year
after year, and what better place than this, where you can heap your
feeble, error-laden attempts at abuse on others, anonymously, not taking
any responsibility for your actions. Can't do that in a department,
school board, or any other meeting where you have to show you face and
own up to what you say.

--

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

Apparently we have the fellow in question...

oly