A collecting forum. CollectingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CollectingBanter forum » Collecting newsgroups » Coins
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Counterfeit detection primer -- periodic post



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 8th 03, 11:59 PM
Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Counterfeit detection primer -- periodic post


Subject: Counterfeit detection primer -- periodic post
From: Reid Goldsborough
Date: 11/8/2003 2:52 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

What follows is a distillation of many people's opinions and
observations, including my own. Additions and corrections are
welcomed. This document is copyrighted -- please don't republish
elsewhere. HMTL version available he
http://rg.ancients.info/guide.

Counterfeit detection primer -- periodic post

- - -
IN A NUTSHELL: Counterfeit coins are an unavoidable reality in the
numismatic marketplace, particularly with ancient coins though with
modern coins as well. Learning the diagnostics of forgeries as well as
the characteristics of authentic coins, buying from reputable dealers,
avoiding sellers with a no-return policy claiming they're selling
coins from an estate, and buying smart in general can minimize your
exposure. The study of counterfeits, along with protecting you, can
also be interesting in itself.
- - -

Perhaps the most frequent question collectors of ancient coins are
asked by noncollectors is, "How do you know it's real?" The
disconcerting answer sometimes is, "You don't." Not with all coins,
not with certainty.

The fact is, significant numbers of counterfeit ancient coins are sold
as authentic coins. But counterfeiting can be a problem for collectors
of modern coins too. Sometimes coins are altered from a common variety
to a rare one, a form of counterfeiting. The issue of counterfeits
shouldn't deter you from collecting either ancient or modern coins.
The number of ancient coin fakes on the market is dwarfed by the
number of genuine coins, which were produced in staggering numbers in
ancient times. The same is true with modern coins. But counterfeiting
is an issue that any savvy collector needs to face.

Counterfeit coin detection, particularly with ancient coins, is as
much art as science. Because ancients were struck by hand and because
of the wide variability of their designs, even the best experts are
sometimes fooled. Dealers bought large numbers of counterfeit ancient
coins as authentic coins at the 1999 and 1988 New York International
Numismatic Conventions, coins that only later were discovered to be
forgeries. Many dealers contacted buyers and refunded their money, but
many of these fakes remain on the market.

The most frequently seen counterfeit or altered U.S. coins, according
to PCGS's 1997 book Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection, include:

* 1856 Flying Eagle cent
* 1909-S VDB Lincoln cent
* 1955 double-die Lincoln cent
* 1916-D Mercury dime
* Cincinnati commemorative half dollar
* 1804 Bust dollar (a million dollar rarity)
* 1893-S Morgan dollar
* Saint-Gaudens high-relief double eagle

Other frequently seen counterfeit or altered U.S. coins, according to
collectors and dealers, include the 1914-D and 1922 Lincoln cents,
1943 bronze Lincoln cent, 1913 Liberty Head nickel (a million dollar
rarity), and 1937-D three-legged Buffalo nickel.

Unless you're a specialist, you should think carefully about buying
any of the above coins unless they're in the slab of a legitimate
grading/authentication service, such as PCGS, NGC, ANACS, or ICG.

With ancient coins, even low-cost specimens are counterfeited today.
As Wayne Sayles points out in his 2001 book Classical Deception:
Counterfeits, Forgeries and Reproductions of Ancient Coins, you can no
longer assume that it's impractical for someone to make deceptive
fakes of inexpensive coins, including someone living in relative
poverty in Eastern Europe who may have advanced engraving skills or
even a university degree in metallurgy.

Counterfeits Online

Fakes of modern and ancient coins sold on eBay as authentic coins are
a frequent problem, though if you follow the online coin discussion
groups, these fakes are frequently exposed. One common scam is for a
seller to create an auction of a counterfeit coin, or many counterfeit
coins, while preventing people from contacting bidders, which is the
most common way that this kind of fraud is stopped (despite the fact
that doing this is against official eBay policy).

You shouldn't count on eBay to prevent or stop the auction of even the
most blatant counterfeits or prevent sellers with a history of selling
large numbers of counterfeits from engaging in online fraud. eBay has
a policy of noninterference, stating that it's just a venue bringing
buyers and sellers together. You're largely on your own. It's a good
idea to stick with reputable sellers -- you can learn who these are by
asking around online -- and avoid sellers who don't offer return
privileges, particularly those claiming to be selling coins from an
estate. The old maxim applies: "If a deal looks too good to be true,
it probably is."

On the other hand, you shouldn't indiscriminately, and irresponsibly,
condemn coins you see online -- online pictures often provide only a
fraction of the information you need to properly evaluate a coin's
authenticity. But there's nothing wrong with questioning a coin
online. If others feel the coin is not suspicious, the seller of the
coin will undoubtedly wind up with favorable publicity, and this can
lead to more bids and a higher selling price.

The coin industry prefers not to discuss too loudly the issue of
counterfeits for fear of scaring off collectors. But knowledge is
power. As a collector, the more you know, the greater the chance
you'll avoid getting taken. Don't overreact and run away. But don't
put your head in the sand either.

Ownership of Counterfeits

The study of counterfeits can actually be an enjoyable part of the
hobby of collecting coins, ancient as well as modern. Some collectors
enjoy creating a "black cabinet" (also called "black museum") of
counterfeit coins for educational purposes, as help in counterfeit
detection, and as examples of the black art of counterfeiting. In his
American Numismatic Association (ANA) video titled "Famous Fakes and
Fakers," Ken Bressett, editor of the Red Book and past president of
the ANA, points out that some counterfeits can be considered "true
numismatic items" that are "enjoyable to study and collect."

The issue of ownership of counterfeit collectable coins, however, is a
controversial one, more so with U.S. coins, which are still legal
tender regardless of their age, than ancient coins. The American
Numismatic Association recommends that you turn in counterfeit coins
to it or the U.S. Secret Service.

But hundreds if not thousands of auction houses, dealers, and
collectors keep counterfeits of collectible coins on hand, and the ANA
recognizes this. Those who elect to keep counterfeits should clearly
identify them on the labels of their holders to help prevent them from
someday inadvertently being sold as genuine coins, says Robert W.
Hoge, former curator at the American Numismatic Association, current
curator at the American Numismatic Society.

The legalities regarding mere possession of these bogus coins aren't
clear. Two areas of U.S. law deal with counterfeit coins. Title 18,
Part I, Chapter 25 (Counterfeiting and Forgery) of the U.S. Code,
Sections 485, 489, and 492 deal with counterfeits of U.S. and world
coins. The Hobby Protection Act of 1973 (Title 15, Chapter 48,
Sections 2101 through 2106 of the U.S. Code, plus 1988 amendments)
deals with counterfeits of ancient coins.

Nothing in the above statutes says that simple possession of
counterfeits of collectible coins is illegal, and no court in the U.S.
has ever ruled on the legality of this. According to Armen R. Vartian,
the most visible numismatic legal expert in the U.S., "The statutes do
not criminalize the mere possession of counterfeit money."

Vartian, a lawyer, numismatist, Coin World legal columnist, and author
of the book A Legal Guide to Buying and Selling Art and Collectibles,
says it's illegal to own counterfeit coins if your intention is to
defraud others with them (sell them as genuine), and it's illegal to
refuse to surrender them if the government asks you to, which it's
entitled to under the law. That's why Vartian and others recommend
that those who maintain black cabinets of counterfeit coins do so
quietly.

Others feel, however, that mere possession of counterfeits of
collectible coins is illegal. Ultimately, it's all opinion because no
law or court has ever specifically addressed the issue (there's no
"judicial clarity"), though some opinions are considerably more
informed than others.

Perhaps the bottom line is that nobody has ever been arrested or fined
in the U.S. for owning a counterfeit of a collectible coin since the
Secret Service, an agency of the U.S. Treasury, began policing the
money supply in 1865 and undoubtedly from before this time as well.
Although the Secret Service has confiscated high-visibility
collections of counterfeits of U.S. coins, this hasn't happened in
some 30 years. The ownership of counterfeits of collectible coins a
non-issue today in the eyes of the authorities.

Protecting Yourself from Fakes

The most commonly repeated advice to avoid getting cheated by
unwittingly buying a counterfeit as an authentic coin is to buy from a
respected dealer or auction house who offers a lifetime guarantee of
authenticity with return privileges. But in the age of the Internet,
deals can often be had through eBay buying from fellow collectors who
are upgrading their coins or otherwise selling them off or buying
ancient coins from direct sellers personally bringing them into the
U.S. from Europe. Even here, though, sellers should offer a lifetime
guarantee of authenticity with return privileges in case the coin
later turns out to be fake.

The most common reason a coin is condemned by an expert as being a
forgery is, "It doesn't look right." Dealers who've handled many
thousands of authentic coins are usually (not always) able to pick out
fakes, even if they're not always able to verbalize why. Part of this
involves knowing what authentic coins of a particular type typically
look like. Part of this involves knowing what counterfeits typically
look like.

Indications of a cast counterfeit include:

* Soft details
* Soapy surfaces
* Round, mushy boundaries where the devices and legends meet the
coin's field
* Pitting from air bubbles created during the casting process.
(Pitting may not appear if centrifugal casting was used. Genuine coins
often show some pitting, or porosity, caused by corrosion, though
these pits are typically rougher at their edges, wider at their
openings, and less round than pits caused by casting.)
* Raised lumps of metal (some genuine ancient coins can show the same
if made from rusty dies)
* A seam around the edge where the two sides of the mold joined
together (it's often filed off, in which case file marks are sometimes
but not always visible; ancient coins made from cast flans may show
evidence of a casting seam)
* Light weight (or sometimes too heavy)
* The existence of the an identical coin -- not only one made from the
same dies but also one with the same centering, strike, wear patterns,
and surface damage (forgers may add surface marks)

Indications of an electrotype counterfeit include:

* Edge seam
* Light weight (or sometimes too heavy)

Indications of a struck counterfeit include:

* Unrealistic styling
* Incorrect letters
* Overly flat and uniform fields, particularly with ancient coins,
caused by the use of a hydraulic press
* Die match of a known forgery
* Light weight (or sometimes too heavy)
* Wrong metal
* With ancient coins, the absence of any crystallization (some
counterfeits are artificially corroded and aged with acids, while
other times ancient metal is used)

Testing

There are also various quantitative tests you can do, or have done, to
help with counterfeit detection. Often, any one test or tests aren't
conclusive, but they can provide important information.

1. Weighing a coin, then comparing it with the common weight range for
that coin.

2. Measuring a coin's diameter, then also comparing it with the common
range for that coin.

3. Specific gravity testing

This is a useful if not infallible test. You need to compare a coin's
weight in two different media, such as air and water, using a
precision scale. However, accuracy can be compromised by tiny air
bubbles adhering to the coin's surface and, with ancient coins,
internal porosity and voids within the coin's interior.

The specific gravity of gold is 19.3, silver is 10.5, copper is 8.8,
bronze is 8.7-7.8 (varies with how much tin, lead, and other metals
it's alloyed with), brass is 8.6-8.4 (varies with how much zinc it's
alloyed with), lead is 11.4, tin is 7.3, zinc (cast) is 6.9, iron
(cast) is 7.2, and aluminum is 2.6.

4. Ring test

Modern silver coins ring when you tap them. Modern non-silver coins
don't, not in the same way. Ancient silver coins don't, not in the
same way. With ancient coins, the reason is crystallization, which
results when the silver alloy leaches copper and other impurities over
time, causing voids between the silver grains. You can sometimes see
under magnification feather-like crystals on the coin's surface,
especially near the edges, though other times the crystallization is
completely internal and invisible.

To perform a ring test, balance the coin on the tip of your finger and
tap it gently with another coin. With modern coins, you can wear a
cotton glove to prevent fingerprints. You need to be careful you don't
drop the coin or tap too hard. Highly crystallized ancient coins can
break easily. If the coin emits a long resonating ring, like a bell,
this indicates that it's a modern silver coin. If it's an ancient
coin, this indicates it hasn't become crystallized, that it's likely a
modern forgery, because crystallization dampens the ring. If the coin
rings for only a second or two, this indicates it may be only slightly
crystallized. If the coin emits a tink and doesn't resonate, this
indicates it may be moderately crystallized. If the coin emits a thud,
this indicates it may be heavily crystallized.

The ring test is far from foolproof, however. Sometimes forgers use
the flans of authentic, though inexpensive, ancient coins to produce
old-metal counterfeits of expensive ancient coins, but this typically
happens only with rare or otherwise pricey specimens. Counterfeits
made of new silver having small, thick flans don't resonate as well as
larger, thinner coins. Counterfeits of new silver may not ring at all
if the flan is cracked, occluded with a gas bubble, or filled with
another substance. Cast or electrotype counterfeits made of new silver
also may not ring. Heavily alloyed silver coins or coins made of
bronze, lead, or other base metals will also not ring like pure or
nearly pure silver coins.

5. Non-destructive x-ray elemental analysis with a scanning electron
microscope

This is another useful if not infallible test that analyzes the
elemental composition of a coin, but only at its surface to a depth of
a few micrometers. The coin is bombarded with electrons, producing
x-rays. Because each element has a unique x-ray signature, it's
possible to detect which elements comprise the coin's surface, down to
a sensitivity of about 0.1 percent (trace elements may not be
detected).

Authentication

Often, a dealer will agree to look at a coin you're questioning,
particularly a dealer you've bought from in the past, and offer his
opinion regarding its authenticity.

All of the established, legitimate grading services that deal with
U.S. coins provide authentication along with grading, including:

PCGS (Professional Coin Grading Service)
http://www.pcgs.com

NGC (Numismatic Guaranty Corporation of America)
http://www.ngccoin.com

ANACS (Amos Certification Service)
http://www.anacs.com

ICG (Independent Coin Grading Co.)
http://www.icgcoin.com

The following services provide ancient coin authentication:

ACCS (Ancient Coin Certification Service)
http://www.davidrsear.com/certification.html

IBSCC (International Bureau for the Suppression of Counterfeit Coins)
http://www.iapn.ch

The British Museum, Department of Coins and Medals
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/cm/cmhome.html

Education

Learning about counterfeits can be fun, in addition to protecting you.
The following are books about counterfeit U.S. coins:

Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection
PCGS
Ballantine Publishing Group, 1997

Counterfeit Detection Reference Guide
Bill Fivaz
Stanton Printing, 1997

Detecting Counterfeit and Altered U.S. Coins: A Correspondence Course
J.P. Martin
American Numismatic Association, 1996

Official Guide to Detecting Altered & Counterfeit U.S. Coins &
Currency
Marc Hudgeons
House of Collectibles, 1981

Standard Catalog of Counterfeit and Altered United States Coins
Virgil Hancock and Larry Spanbauer
Sanford J. Durst, 1979

Counterfeit, Mis-struck, and Unofficial U.S. Coins: A Guide for the
Detection of Cast and Struck Counterfeits, Electro-types, and Altered
Coins
Don Taxay
Arco Pub. Co., 1963

The following Web sites provide information and/or photos of fake
ancient coins:

Calgary's Modern Fakes of Ancient Coins
Information and photos of fakes of ancient coins
http://www.calgarycoin.com/reference/fakes/fakes.htm

Barry & Darling Ancient Coins' Counterfeits and Counterfeiters
Information and photos of fakes of ancient coins
http://www.ancient-times.com/newsletters/n13/n13.html

Doug Smith's Fakes
Information and photos of fakes of ancient coins
http://www.ancientcoinmarket.com/ds/fakes/fakes.html

Twelve Caesar's Fakes & Forgeries
Information and photos of fakes of ancient coins
http://www.12caesars.com/Fakes___For...forgeries.html

Dennis Kroh's Ancient Coins & Modern Fakes
Information about fakes of ancient coins
http://members.aol.com/kroh/fakes.html

CGB-CFG Fakes
Photos of fakes of ancient coins
http://www.cgb.fr/monnaies/articles/faux/indexgb.html

Jencek's Modern Forgeries of Ancient Coins
Photos of fakes of ancient coins

http://www.ancient-coins.com/shop/ag...ies.htm&cart_i

d=536193.26909*sf3lp4?

Forgeries of Ancient Roman and Greek Coins
Photos of fakes of ancient coins offered for sale as authentic coins
on eBay
http://www.chijanofuji.com/ancientforgeries.html

Fakes Gallery
Photos mostly of Slavey replicas of ancient coins
http://www.ancientcoinart.com/fakes_gallery.html

Slavey Replicas
Photos of Slavey replicas of ancient coins
http://people2.clarityconnect.com/we...ei_repros.html

Discussing Fakes

The following are two e-mail discussion groups specifically about
counterfeit coins:

CoinForgeryDiscussionList
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CoinForgeryDiscussionList

ACFDL (Ancient Coin Forgeries Discussion List)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ACFDL

The Usenet discussion group rec.collecting.coins can be a good
resource for getting opinions about questionable U.S. coins. You can
access it through a newsreader such as Forte Agent, e-mail program
with newsreading capabilities such as Microsoft Outlook Express, or
the Web through Google Groups at http://groups.google.com.

More Information

Counterfeit Coin Bulletin
http://www.money.org/publicationsdept.html
Subscription periodical about recently discovered U.S., world, and
ancient counterfeit coins American Numismatic Association (ANA) and
the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN)

Counterfeit Coin Club
http://www.brindin.com/hyperdict/ccc
Group in Canada that puts out a subscription quarterly newsletter
about counterfeit coins

Here are some Web pages I've put together about counterfeit coins:

Draped Bust Dollar Counterfeits
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/reidgo...ts/page_7.html

Bulgarian School Counterfeits of Apollonia Pontika Drachms
http://www.rg.cointalk.org/bulgarian_school

Parion Hemidrachm and Forgeries
http://rg.ancients.info/parion

Thracian and Thasos Tetradrachm Forgeries
http://rg.ancients.info/thracetets/forgery.html

Three Alexander the Great Fourees
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/reidgold/fourees

Deks: Three Ancient Greek Dekadrachms, Fake and Real
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/reidgold/deks

Ultimately, as long as you're careful, you shouldn't fret over the
possibility of getting fooled by counterfeits. As Sayles points out,
virtually all serious collectors of ancient coins, for instance, will
sooner or later unwittingly add a fake to their collection, and this
is not necessarily a sign of naivete. With U.S. coins, the grading
services have greatly reduced the chances of being cheated with
high-end specimens.


--

Email: (delete "remove this")

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








Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--
Ads
  #2  
Old November 9th 03, 12:05 AM
A.Gent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Jim.
Saved me the trouble.

J.

"Jim" wrote in message
...

Subject: Counterfeit detection primer -- periodic post
From: Reid Goldsborough
Date: 11/8/2003 2:52 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

What follows is a distillation of many people's opinions


snip


  #4  
Old November 9th 03, 02:12 AM
Phil DeMayo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Reid Goldsborough wrote:

What follows is......


Considered by some to contain much self-serving drivel.

balance snipped


Periodic Response:

No copyright claimed, intended or implied:

As a service to those who might actually believe what is
written in the periodically posted "counterfeit detection
primer" regarding the legalities of possessing counterfeit
coins, I offer the following:

US Code Title 49 Subtitle X Chapter 803 Section 80302
specifically defines forged, altered and counterfeit coins
of the United States or any other government of a foreign
country as contraband.

In upholding a lower Court decision regarding the possession
of counterfeits in the case of JSG Boggs v. Robert E. Rubin,
Secretary of the Treasury, et al, the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit stated the
following regarding contraband:

“Contraband per se comprises objects which are inherently
unlawful to possess, regardless of how they are used.”

The decision of the Court was appealed to the United States
Supreme Court who declined to hear the case.

Additionally, US Code Title 18, Part I - Crimes, Chapter 25
- Counterfeiting and Forgery, Section 492 - Forfeiture of
Counterfeit Parephenalia requires that all counterfeit coins
be surrendered to the government. It further states that if
the government has to ask you to surrender the counterfeits,
and you refuse, you can be fined and/or jailed.

In their decision against Boggs, the Court of Appeals quoted
the text of this statute and upheld the lower Court’s ruling
that this statute did prohibit possession of counterfeits.

The Hobby Protection Act mentioned by the author of the
“counterfeit detection primer” is basically a set of
guidelines under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade
Commission for the legal manufacture or import of imitation
numismatic and political items.

The Hobby Protection Act specifically states that it does
not replace of supercede existing counterfeiting laws and
contains absolutely no evidence to support the author’s
claim that it is the applicable law pertaining to fakes of
ancient coins.

The author claims the former ANA Curator advises marking the
holder containing the fake coin. This advice runs counter to
the requirements of the organization he worked for at the
time the author interviewed him. The ANA Member Code of
Ethics requires that the marking be done in the metal of the
coin.

Finally, the author fails to mention that this former ANA
Curator and a man the author identified as “the top
counterfeiting guy at Secret Service headquarters” both told
him that possession of counterfeit coins was indeed illegal.

++++++++++
Phil DeMayo - always here for my fellow Stooge
When bidding online always sit on your helmet
Just say NO to counterfeits
  #5  
Old November 15th 03, 07:20 PM
Nick Knight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In , on 11/15/2003
at 01:00 PM, Reid Goldsborough said:

Phil DeMayo isn't a lawyer but plays one on the Internet, combining various
unrelated statutes and nonbinding court cases and pronouncing definitively,
over and over, what's legal and what's not when there's anything but
judicial clarity ...


You forgot to mention his tendency to FABRICATE text and modify passages to
support his "position". How can you be wrong when you can always modify
existing text so that it reads the way you want? Just modify and offer as
original!

For two blaring examples, see the secion entitled Phil's Phib at:

http://rcc.servehttp.com/#Phib

There is other pertinant information on this page; directly related is the
section entitled "Hardheads and Counterfeits (the Bogophobic)".

Phil is simply an old, hard-headed dunce. One of a pack of 4 core
..composters who no one should take seriously. He is the centerpiece of my
killfile set, and well deservedly so.

Nick
  #6  
Old November 15th 03, 08:23 PM
Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Reid Goldsborough wants to make it clear for the
last time and set the record staright, especially for all those impressionable
newbies as well as for his alter ego sweetie Nancy.....

Reid Goldsborough isn't a journalist but plays one on the Internet, combining

various unrelated postings and non-sensical drivel and pronouncing
definitively, over and over, what's collectible and what's not, who's a "real
numismatist" and who's not, when there's anything but market clarity about the
subject of ownership of collectible coins.

He has said that Nancy Knight, the
most visible yet irritating numismatic nutjob closest to his heart, has
recently written a peculiar website showcasing the fruits of her vile and
paranoic thoughts, referred to sarcastically as 'text collecting' when done by
others, but somehow proper in her skillful hands. BTW, the word 'hypocrite' is
never used therein, except when referring to others.

Nancy has said that you don't need to interpret or read posts, just skew them.
From her reading of the posts, sans interpretation and context, she has warned
people repeatedly about the dire social and legal consequences they face if
they text-collect her off line e-mailings and regurgitate them publicly. That's
not 'fun' text-collecting, she says.

She is moralistic in the extreme, impugning the ethics of those who collect
text about her, yet whose own ethics online leave a great deal to be desired, a
gauge of her own maturity, exemplified by among other things her posting of
pictures of her high school reunion on her Web site, but yet not having the
common courtesy to identify herself, thereby depriving the world of a focused
scorn. Oh, and she can't spell worth a ****.

Whether she or Reid, their sole or at least primary source of "research" is
Google and/or postings and lame OS/2 threads. They believe whatever they find,
particularly if it comes from an "official" source such as the darkside of the
moon or the murmurings of their own psyches.

Reids purpose in putting out information isn't to disseminate truth but to
support his
own entrenched ideas, to promote his agenda. He has said flat-out that mistakes
on Usenet don't count, because he's not getting paid for "those" writings, yet
fails to see how those myriad repeated mistakes, gaffes and steps in kaka (my
homage to animagifs) could affect his credibility!

When it becomes clear that he's wrong about a point, Reid retreats to the
Websters Dictionary where he culls fringe vocabulary and foists it upon the
unwitting public in a machine gun manner, reminiscent of an ADD afflicted child
continually blurting "glom a (add a noun)" or other. Ever hear the word
"connoisseurship" in your own poor miserable life?

When confronted with corrective advice, you'll never hear Reid say "I hadn't
considered that," or "That's something I didn't know," or "I need to check more
into this," or "You may be right." No, not Reid. Breen couldn't write a
truthful sentence, Bowers might have a future in publishing and all who disgree
with Reid, are Usenet scum, full of ****y junk and flame tards, a variation
BTW, on the word o Jims, Reid-Tard.

Reids own criticisms of others primarily reflect not important mistakes in
fact, but reinforce and support the notion that he is a moron, incapable of
independent and inspired thought. Reid exemplifies, perhaps better than other
individual in this newsgroup, the unreliability of information on the Internet
and the sad "electronic shut-in" mentality of a small but disproportionately
loud segment of the Usenet population.

Wow Reid, that must have been both tough and cathartic. I'm sure I speak for
many on RCC when I say, Bravo. It's about time you came clean and faced up to
what a witless maroon you really are.

Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--
  #7  
Old November 16th 03, 12:36 AM
A.Gent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just archiving... nothing to reid here. Move along...


"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 17:52:44 -0500, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

What follows is a distillation of many people's opinions and
observations, including my own. Additions and corrections are
welcomed. This document is copyrighted -- please don't republish
elsewhere. HMTL version available he http://rg.ancients.info/guide.


This is in response to further nonsense from Phil DeMayo about this
subject, gleaned from a periodic Google Groups search.

Phil DeMayo isn't a lawyer but plays one on the Internet, combining
various unrelated statutes and nonbinding court cases and pronouncing
definitively, over and over, what's legal and what's not when there's
anything but judicial clarity about the subject of ownership of
counterfeits of collectible coins. He has said that Armen Vartian, the
most visible numismatic legal expert in the country, a lawyer who
writes a legal column for Coin World, has recently written a
particular column about the legalities of collecting counterfeit
coins, and has written a book about collectibles and the law, must not
have read the counterfeit statutes because his interpretation differs
from Phil's. Phil has said that you don't need to interpret laws, just
read them. From his reading of the laws, sans interpretation and
context, he has warned people repeatedly about the dire legal
consequence they face if they collect counterfeit coins, including
jail, fines, and car confiscated, when none of these consequences have
ever taken place. He is legalistic in the extreme, contending that all
laws and all rules should be followed to the letter, yet
hypocritically refusing to answer the simple question of whether he
himself has broken the law by driving faster than the speed limit, in
response only calling others hypocritical. He is moralistic in the
extreme, impugning the ethics of those who collect or study or write
about counterfeits yet whose ethics online leave a great deal to be
desired, not to mention his maturity, exemplified by among other
things his taking a picture of me from my Web site, defacing it, then
putting it on his Web site. He doesn't understand the difference
between jurisprudence and ethics, simplemindedly equating the two, and
between counterfeits and replicas, simplemindedly equating the two.
His sole or at least primary source of "research" is Google, and he
appears to believe whatever he finds, particularly if it comes from an
"official" source such as a government Web site. His purpose in
putting out information isn't to disseminate truth but to support his
own entrenched ideas, to promote his agenda. He has said flat-out that
he doesn't make mistakes and his online debating style reflects this
-- sheer stuck-in-the-mud, never-budge-an-inch intransigence. When it
becomes clear that he's wrong about a point, he has repeatedly blurted
out "Bite me!" rather than saying, level-headedly, "I hadn't
considered that," or "That's something I didn't know," or "I need to
check more into this," or "You may be right." His own criticisms of
others primarily reflect not important mistakes in fact but picayune
gnat-like needling, and he follows people around to various online
forums, an Internet stalker, offering only negative comments, or at
least does with me. He exemplifies, perhaps better than other
individual in this newsgroup, the unreliability of information on the
Internet and the sad "electronic shut-in" mentality of a small but
disproportionately loud segment of the Usenet population.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

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



  #8  
Old November 16th 03, 01:14 AM
A.Gent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Reid Goldsborough" replied to himself in
message ...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 17:52:44 -0500, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

What follows is a distillation of many people's opinions and
observations, including my own. Additions and corrections are
welcomed. This document is copyrighted -- please don't republish
elsewhere. HMTL version available he http://rg.ancients.info/guide.


This is in response to further nonsense from Phil DeMayo about this
subject, gleaned from a periodic Google Groups search.


Translation:
"I really *do* have him killfiled - honest - and its just bad luck that I
found him on Google."


Phil DeMayo isn't a lawyer but plays one on the Internet, combining
various unrelated statutes


Tranlslation:
"Well, *I* can't see any relationship..."

...and nonbinding court cases and pronouncing
definitively, over and over, what's legal and what's not when there's
anything but judicial clarity about the subject of ownership of
counterfeits of collectible coins. He has said that Armen Vartian, the
most visible numismatic legal expert in the country, a lawyer who
writes a legal column for Coin World, has recently written a
particular column about the legalities of collecting counterfeit
coins, and has written a book about collectibles and the law,


Translation:
"He's written a book, therefore he's right"
(The C-grade journo's creed.)

...must not
have read the counterfeit statutes because his interpretation differs
from Phil's. Phil has said that you don't need to interpret laws, just
read them. From his reading of the laws, sans interpretation and
context, he has warned people repeatedly about the dire legal
consequence they face if they collect counterfeit coins, including
jail, fines, and car confiscated, when none of these consequences have
ever taken place. He is legalistic in the extreme, contending that all
laws and all rules should be followed to the letter, yet
hypocritically refusing to answer the simple question of whether he
himself has broken the law by driving faster than the speed limit,


Translation:
"I don't really understand the concept of 'intent', but that's OK, 'cause
I'm sure the courts don't either."

...in
response only calling others hypocritical. He is moralistic in the
extreme, impugning the ethics of those who collect or study or write
about counterfeits yet whose ethics online leave a great deal to be
desired, not to mention his maturity, exemplified by among other
things his taking a picture of me from my Web site, defacing it, then
putting it on his Web site.


Translation:
"Its OK for *me* to do this, but heaven help anyone else who does..."
http://www.netaxs.com/~reidgold/column/reid_pinch.html

or

"It funny when I do it, but its hurtful when someone else does. ...
What's that? - 'hypocritical'? - What's that mean?"


...He doesn't understand the difference
between jurisprudence and ethics, simplemindedly equating the two,


Translation:
"Whereas I *know* what (for example) 'amateurish' means:

'The RCC ember design is amateurish' : http://tinyurl.com/v5wm
'Some Roman coin designs are amateurish' : http://tinyurl.com/v5wv

'Yet when *I* am accused of being "amateurish", it means "done for payment
and done well" : http://tinyurl.com/v5x2

... and
between counterfeits and replicas, simplemindedly equating the two.
His sole or at least primary source of "research" is Google, and he
appears to believe whatever he finds, particularly if it comes from an
"official" source such as a government Web site. His purpose in
putting out information


Translation:
"I immediately know *exactly* what his purpose is. I know what *everyone's*
purpose is, because I have a unique and incredibly sophisticated insight
into the motivations of the human psyche.

I'm just that clever."

... isn't to disseminate truth but to support his
own entrenched ideas, to promote his agenda. He has said flat-out that
he doesn't make mistakes and his online debating style reflects this
-- sheer stuck-in-the-mud, never-budge-an-inch intransigence.


Translation:
"What do you mean - 'a classic case of Projection'? What does that mean?"

... When it
becomes clear that he's wrong about a point, he has repeatedly blurted
out "Bite me!" rather than saying, level-headedly, "I hadn't
considered that," or "That's something I didn't know," or "I need to
check more into this," or "You may be right."


Translation:
"He's just a mindless ****y flametard who calls people names, so I killfiled
him."

... His own criticisms of
others primarily reflect not important mistakes in fact but picayune
gnat-like needling, and he follows people around to various online
forums, an Internet stalker, offering only negative comments, or at
least does with me. He exemplifies, perhaps better than other
individual in this newsgroup,


Translation:
"Except for *me* of course."
and
"Leave it me to decide which 'facts' are important."

... the unreliability of information on the
Internet and the sad "electronic shut-in" mentality of a small but
disproportionately loud segment of the Usenet population.


Translation:
"I'm not loud. Its not *my* fault that Google returns 13,300 hits on a
search of my name in RCC."
===========================
In conclusion, don't forget to visit http://mendosus.com/glomthis.html for a
complete yet simple explanation of Reid's true motives.




  #9  
Old November 16th 03, 02:14 AM
Donald F. Boudreau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 15 Nov 2003 19:23:49 GMT, rosit (Jim) wrote:

BRAVO

Reid Goldsborough
wants to make it clear for the
last time and set the record staright, especially for all those impressionable
newbies as well as for his alter ego sweetie Nancy.....

Reid Goldsborough isn't a journalist but plays one on the Internet, combining

various unrelated postings and non-sensical drivel and pronouncing
definitively, over and over, what's collectible and what's not, who's a "real
numismatist" and who's not, when there's anything but market clarity about the
subject of ownership of collectible coins.

He has said that Nancy Knight, the
most visible yet irritating numismatic nutjob closest to his heart, has
recently written a peculiar website showcasing the fruits of her vile and
paranoic thoughts, referred to sarcastically as 'text collecting' when done by
others, but somehow proper in her skillful hands. BTW, the word 'hypocrite' is
never used therein, except when referring to others.

Nancy has said that you don't need to interpret or read posts, just skew them.
From her reading of the posts, sans interpretation and context, she has warned
people repeatedly about the dire social and legal consequences they face if
they text-collect her off line e-mailings and regurgitate them publicly. That's
not 'fun' text-collecting, she says.

She is moralistic in the extreme, impugning the ethics of those who collect
text about her, yet whose own ethics online leave a great deal to be desired, a
gauge of her own maturity, exemplified by among other things her posting of
pictures of her high school reunion on her Web site, but yet not having the
common courtesy to identify herself, thereby depriving the world of a focused
scorn. Oh, and she can't spell worth a ****.

Whether she or Reid, their sole or at least primary source of "research" is
Google and/or postings and lame OS/2 threads. They believe whatever they find,
particularly if it comes from an "official" source such as the darkside of the
moon or the murmurings of their own psyches.

Reids purpose in putting out information isn't to disseminate truth but to
support his
own entrenched ideas, to promote his agenda. He has said flat-out that mistakes
on Usenet don't count, because he's not getting paid for "those" writings, yet
fails to see how those myriad repeated mistakes, gaffes and steps in kaka (my
homage to animagifs) could affect his credibility!

When it becomes clear that he's wrong about a point, Reid retreats to the
Websters Dictionary where he culls fringe vocabulary and foists it upon the
unwitting public in a machine gun manner, reminiscent of an ADD afflicted child
continually blurting "glom a (add a noun)" or other. Ever hear the word
"connoisseurship" in your own poor miserable life?

When confronted with corrective advice, you'll never hear Reid say "I hadn't
considered that," or "That's something I didn't know," or "I need to check more
into this," or "You may be right." No, not Reid. Breen couldn't write a
truthful sentence, Bowers might have a future in publishing and all who disgree
with Reid, are Usenet scum, full of ****y junk and flame tards, a variation
BTW, on the word o Jims, Reid-Tard.

Reids own criticisms of others primarily reflect not important mistakes in
fact, but reinforce and support the notion that he is a moron, incapable of
independent and inspired thought. Reid exemplifies, perhaps better than other
individual in this newsgroup, the unreliability of information on the Internet
and the sad "electronic shut-in" mentality of a small but disproportionately
loud segment of the Usenet population.

Wow Reid, that must have been both tough and cathartic. I'm sure I speak for
many on RCC when I say, Bravo. It's about time you came clean and faced up to
what a witless maroon you really are.

Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--


Don

If you ask enough people for advice, you're bound to find someone
to advise you to do what you wanted to do anyway.


  #10  
Old November 16th 03, 02:17 AM
Donald F. Boudreau
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:14:29 +1100, "A.Gent" wrote:


"Reid Goldsborough" replied to himself in
message ...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 17:52:44 -0500, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:

What follows is a distillation of many people's opinions and
observations, including my own. Additions and corrections are
welcomed. This document is copyrighted -- please don't republish
elsewhere. HMTL version available he http://rg.ancients.info/guide.


This is in response to further nonsense from Phil DeMayo about this
subject, gleaned from a periodic Google Groups search.


Translation:
"I really *do* have him killfiled - honest - and its just bad luck that I
found him on Google."


BRAVO


Phil DeMayo isn't a lawyer but plays one on the Internet, combining
various unrelated statutes


Tranlslation:
"Well, *I* can't see any relationship..."

...and nonbinding court cases and pronouncing
definitively, over and over, what's legal and what's not when there's
anything but judicial clarity about the subject of ownership of
counterfeits of collectible coins. He has said that Armen Vartian, the
most visible numismatic legal expert in the country, a lawyer who
writes a legal column for Coin World, has recently written a
particular column about the legalities of collecting counterfeit
coins, and has written a book about collectibles and the law,


Translation:
"He's written a book, therefore he's right"
(The C-grade journo's creed.)

...must not
have read the counterfeit statutes because his interpretation differs
from Phil's. Phil has said that you don't need to interpret laws, just
read them. From his reading of the laws, sans interpretation and
context, he has warned people repeatedly about the dire legal
consequence they face if they collect counterfeit coins, including
jail, fines, and car confiscated, when none of these consequences have
ever taken place. He is legalistic in the extreme, contending that all
laws and all rules should be followed to the letter, yet
hypocritically refusing to answer the simple question of whether he
himself has broken the law by driving faster than the speed limit,


Translation:
"I don't really understand the concept of 'intent', but that's OK, 'cause
I'm sure the courts don't either."

...in
response only calling others hypocritical. He is moralistic in the
extreme, impugning the ethics of those who collect or study or write
about counterfeits yet whose ethics online leave a great deal to be
desired, not to mention his maturity, exemplified by among other
things his taking a picture of me from my Web site, defacing it, then
putting it on his Web site.


Translation:
"Its OK for *me* to do this, but heaven help anyone else who does..."
http://www.netaxs.com/~reidgold/column/reid_pinch.html

or

"It funny when I do it, but its hurtful when someone else does. ...
What's that? - 'hypocritical'? - What's that mean?"


...He doesn't understand the difference
between jurisprudence and ethics, simplemindedly equating the two,


Translation:
"Whereas I *know* what (for example) 'amateurish' means:

'The RCC ember design is amateurish' : http://tinyurl.com/v5wm
'Some Roman coin designs are amateurish' : http://tinyurl.com/v5wv

'Yet when *I* am accused of being "amateurish", it means "done for payment
and done well" : http://tinyurl.com/v5x2

... and
between counterfeits and replicas, simplemindedly equating the two.
His sole or at least primary source of "research" is Google, and he
appears to believe whatever he finds, particularly if it comes from an
"official" source such as a government Web site. His purpose in
putting out information


Translation:
"I immediately know *exactly* what his purpose is. I know what *everyone's*
purpose is, because I have a unique and incredibly sophisticated insight
into the motivations of the human psyche.

I'm just that clever."

... isn't to disseminate truth but to support his
own entrenched ideas, to promote his agenda. He has said flat-out that
he doesn't make mistakes and his online debating style reflects this
-- sheer stuck-in-the-mud, never-budge-an-inch intransigence.


Translation:
"What do you mean - 'a classic case of Projection'? What does that mean?"

... When it
becomes clear that he's wrong about a point, he has repeatedly blurted
out "Bite me!" rather than saying, level-headedly, "I hadn't
considered that," or "That's something I didn't know," or "I need to
check more into this," or "You may be right."


Translation:
"He's just a mindless ****y flametard who calls people names, so I killfiled
him."

... His own criticisms of
others primarily reflect not important mistakes in fact but picayune
gnat-like needling, and he follows people around to various online
forums, an Internet stalker, offering only negative comments, or at
least does with me. He exemplifies, perhaps better than other
individual in this newsgroup,


Translation:
"Except for *me* of course."
and
"Leave it me to decide which 'facts' are important."

... the unreliability of information on the
Internet and the sad "electronic shut-in" mentality of a small but
disproportionately loud segment of the Usenet population.


Translation:
"I'm not loud. Its not *my* fault that Google returns 13,300 hits on a
search of my name in RCC."
===========================
In conclusion, don't forget to visit http://mendosus.com/glomthis.html for a
complete yet simple explanation of Reid's true motives.




Don

If you ask enough people for advice, you're bound to find someone
to advise you to do what you wanted to do anyway.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Periodic Post: Your Rec.Collecting.Coins (RCC) Mint Stujoe Coins 10 October 29th 03 06:28 AM
How to avoid getting cheated on eBay - periodic post Reid Goldsborough Coins 1 August 16th 03 01:30 AM
Coin grading/authentication services -- periodic post Linda Coins 6 August 8th 03 06:25 AM
Help on telling repro Linda Coins 11 July 30th 03 02:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CollectingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.