Fakes and Terrorism (Again)

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:30:25 -0400, (Edward
McGrath) wrote:

I think gogu has a
crazy loon that follows him around obsessively in Rcc.

Loony is the word for it. I'm sure it happens in other newsgroups,
where some angry, disturbed person not only obsessively flames another
participant but creates multiple flame Web pages devoted to him.
Stranger things have happened. It's interesting in a way thinking
about the dynamics and causes. Though Jeff R. is the looniest, there's
a lot of similarity in what he, DeMayo, and Williams do. Each of them
puts on airs of moral superiority. Each of them is sanctimonious and
hypocritical.


Reid, why won't you answer the specific criticisms I have made of your
posts?

--
Jeff R.

Reid wrote:
snip
I believe you're right about the mentally disturbed part. No healthy
person acts like this. With each of them, I believe, there's reason
for their pathology, in some cases self-revealed, in some cases not,
as yet.

I believe that the definition of insane is to continue doing the same
thing over and over again and expecting a different result. What did
you expect Reid? A little less pontificating would go a long way.

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:47:40 +1000, "Jeff R"
wrote:

"YOU HAVE TO LIKE IT!"

...which is all I've ever said.

I'll say it again:

I don't like haggling over the price.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is NOT "all you've ever said." This is
another characteristic of people like you, shared by the others,
flamers who deny, deny, deny what you say and do. Here's what you
said, word for word, YOUR words:

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:51:22 +1000

"I consider haggling over the price as akin to begging for spare
change at the railway station. It is undignified and unpleasant. It
yields 'victories to the most obnoxious and insulting buyers....

"It seems to me that most folk prefer it that buying should be a
-game-, where the rudest, most aggressive, and most persistently
obnoxious loudmouth should get the best deal. People who find it
'fun' would likely have found shoplifting 'fun', in their youth....

"Haggling belongs in Marrakesh. Leave it there."

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:02:11 +1000

"Haggling is a process of begging, whining, demanding, standing-over,
bullying, offering, persisting and otherwise making so much of a
nuisance of oneself that the seller relents and lowers the price....

"Some folk like to haggle because they see sport in driving the price
down, and reducing the seller's margin. The more they diddle the
seller, the better it is and the cleverer thay are. I don't see the
joy in depriving the seller of his profit. Its akin to shoplifting.
Dealers aren't in the business for their health. They sell to pay the
bills. To put food on the table. To pay for the kids' education. To
pay the mortgage. The fact that their commodity is *our* discretionary
pastime is irrelevant."

These are the words, your words, of a sanctimonious blowhard so out of
touch with what goes on the numismatic marketplace to render
everything you say about coins mindless drivel.

Negotiating, as I said, is more often win-win. It's a rational and
soundly economic way of gauging fair market prices for coins bought
and sold. It's a game, yes, but with commonly understood guidelines,
boundaries, and expectations, where "begging, whining, demanding,
bullying" and all the other nonsense you talk about does not play a
part. Instead, participants rely on psychology, persuasion, good
sportsmanship, and good humor.

Yes, you're entitled to your opinion. But a normal, rational person,
instead of condemning one of the central practices of numismatics as
ethically depraved for at least the partial purpose of saying that
describing a well negotiated coin deal in the course of a conversation
is "Goldsborough mentality," would have simple said I don't care for
it, it's not for me. But you're a flamer, and reason and rationality
mean nothing to you, only the fight, only trying to castigate others
in negative terms, no matter how mindlessly or stupidly.

I'm trying, as I do, to extricate myself from this thread. I don't
always succeed. No doubt you and other flamers will derive immense
gratification that I can't, yet, pull myself away. Feel free to offer
some more of your mindless belligerence.

If you have some constructive criticism to offer about something I've
posted here, I'm open to it. If I've made a factual mistake, as I've
said many times, I very much appreciate being corrected so I don't
make the same mistake again. But don't expect me to respond to further
idiocy about how I'm immoral because I brag about depriving dealers of
the ability to earn profits and pay for their children's education.

And don't you dare talk about how I troll and engage in unprovoked
rudeness "with bile-soaked and venomous posts." Coming from you, with
your wacked out, beyond the pale flame Web pages that are juvenile to
the extreme. I respond, not always, but sometimes, and sometimes in
kind, when attacked by flamers. Understand the difference between
debate, where you try to undermine, even destroy, the argument of
whoever you're debating, which has a long tradition among academics in
the academic press, which is part of the very essence of the
democratic process in the Western world and has been since the time of
ancient Greece, and leveling a personal attack, a flame, against
another person for offering opinions that differ from your own, which
unfortunately has a long tradition in the online world and has no
redeeming value whatsoever.

But all this no doubt will be way beyond you. Surprise me.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

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

The sermon according to Goldsborough (as told to Jeff)::

Understand the difference between
debate, where you try to undermine, even destroy, the argument of
whoever you're debating, which has a long tradition among academics in
the academic press, which is part of the very essence of the
democratic process in the Western world and has been since the time of
ancient Greece, and leveling a personal attack, a flame, against
another person for offering opinions that differ from your own, which
unfortunately has a long tradition in the online world and has no
redeeming value whatsoever.

When will you learn to practice what you preach?

[ more RG hypocricy archived for future reference ]

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:47:40 +1000, "Jeff R"
wrote:
I don't like haggling over the price.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is NOT "all you've ever said." This is
another characteristic of people like you, shared by the others,
flamers who deny, deny, deny what you say and do. Here's what you
said, word for word, YOUR words:

snipped quotes

I stand by every word I have ever said in this and any NG.
(Unlike you, Mr "Delete-Embarrassing-Posts" Goldsborough.

I still don't like haggling over the price.

I've never said that you can't do it.
I've never said that you can't enjoy it.

I've just expressed my opinion.
Just because *YOU* don't happen to agree with it, or like it, doesn't make
it any less valid.

Now:
How about answering the criticisms I posted - what? - two days ago.

--
Jeff R.

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...


If you have some constructive criticism to offer about something I've
posted here, I'm open to it. If I've made a factual mistake, as I've
said many times, I very much appreciate being corrected so I don't
make the same mistake again. But don't expect me to respond to further
idiocy about how I'm immoral because I brag about depriving dealers of
the ability to earn profits and pay for their children's education.

Why?
Because the truth hurts?


And don't you dare talk about how I troll and engage in unprovoked
rudeness "with bile-soaked and venomous posts."

OK.
For you next reposting exercise, count up :

* how many times I have initiated troll or flame posts against you, and
* how many times I have responded to your bile-soaked and venomous posts in
kind.

See?

You flame, I respond in kind.
You are rude, I'm rude back to you.

I have *never* flamed you nor trolled one of your posts in which you have
been polite, courteous and decent.

Prove me wrong. Go on.
I haven't deleted any of my posts. Unlike...

--
Jeff R.
(still waiting fdor the "g I'm out'a here" )

I'm in the process of reading 91 old UK coin magazines that I bought
recently off ebay, why did I want 91 old magazines you are asking? They
are from the 1960's and I didn't start buying coin magazines until 1969
so I have a lot of "missing" ones to get.

Anyway, the point of this post is that on page 755 of "Coins and
Medals", the page numbers ran for a year's issues, the editor's comments
column includes this,

"Proof sets are not moving. The demand for these was mainly from the
American market, and it now seems to have fallen from favour.
Collectors wishing to add further sets can find good bargains at below
catalogue by researching carefully and making reasonable offers to the
vendors."

Shock horror!!! The editor of a coin magazine encourages price
haggling!! Will the sky fall in? Not so far as the magazine is dated
December 1966. Billy


Reid Goldsborough wrote:

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:47:40 +1000, "Jeff R"
wrote:

"YOU HAVE TO LIKE IT!"

...which is all I've ever said.

I'll say it again:

I don't like haggling over the price.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is NOT "all you've ever said." This is
another characteristic of people like you, shared by the others,
flamers who deny, deny, deny what you say and do. Here's what you
said, word for word, YOUR words:

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:51:22 +1000

"I consider haggling over the price as akin to begging for spare
change at the railway station. It is undignified and unpleasant. It
yields 'victories to the most obnoxious and insulting buyers....

"It seems to me that most folk prefer it that buying should be a
-game-, where the rudest, most aggressive, and most persistently
obnoxious loudmouth should get the best deal. People who find it
'fun' would likely have found shoplifting 'fun', in their youth....

"Haggling belongs in Marrakesh. Leave it there."

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:02:11 +1000

"Haggling is a process of begging, whining, demanding, standing-over,
bullying, offering, persisting and otherwise making so much of a
nuisance of oneself that the seller relents and lowers the price....

"Some folk like to haggle because they see sport in driving the price
down, and reducing the seller's margin. The more they diddle the
seller, the better it is and the cleverer thay are. I don't see the
joy in depriving the seller of his profit. Its akin to shoplifting.
Dealers aren't in the business for their health. They sell to pay the
bills. To put food on the table. To pay for the kids' education. To
pay the mortgage. The fact that their commodity is *our* discretionary
pastime is irrelevant."

These are the words, your words, of a sanctimonious blowhard so out of
touch with what goes on the numismatic marketplace to render
everything you say about coins mindless drivel.

Negotiating, as I said, is more often win-win. It's a rational and
soundly economic way of gauging fair market prices for coins bought
and sold. It's a game, yes, but with commonly understood guidelines,
boundaries, and expectations, where "begging, whining, demanding,
bullying" and all the other nonsense you talk about does not play a
part. Instead, participants rely on psychology, persuasion, good
sportsmanship, and good humor.

Yes, you're entitled to your opinion. But a normal, rational person,
instead of condemning one of the central practices of numismatics as
ethically depraved for at least the partial purpose of saying that
describing a well negotiated coin deal in the course of a conversation
is "Goldsborough mentality," would have simple said I don't care for
it, it's not for me. But you're a flamer, and reason and rationality
mean nothing to you, only the fight, only trying to castigate others
in negative terms, no matter how mindlessly or stupidly.

I'm trying, as I do, to extricate myself from this thread. I don't
always succeed. No doubt you and other flamers will derive immense
gratification that I can't, yet, pull myself away. Feel free to offer
some more of your mindless belligerence.

If you have some constructive criticism to offer about something I've
posted here, I'm open to it. If I've made a factual mistake, as I've
said many times, I very much appreciate being corrected so I don't
make the same mistake again. But don't expect me to respond to further
idiocy about how I'm immoral because I brag about depriving dealers of
the ability to earn profits and pay for their children's education.

And don't you dare talk about how I troll and engage in unprovoked
rudeness "with bile-soaked and venomous posts." Coming from you, with
your wacked out, beyond the pale flame Web pages that are juvenile to
the extreme. I respond, not always, but sometimes, and sometimes in
kind, when attacked by flamers. Understand the difference between
debate, where you try to undermine, even destroy, the argument of
whoever you're debating, which has a long tradition among academics in
the academic press, which is part of the very essence of the
democratic process in the Western world and has been since the time of
ancient Greece, and leveling a personal attack, a flame, against
another person for offering opinions that differ from your own, which
unfortunately has a long tradition in the online world and has no
redeeming value whatsoever.

But all this no doubt will be way beyond you. Surprise me.

--

Email: (delete "remove this")

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

In , on 06/04/2005
at 12:02 AM, Reid Goldsborough said:

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:47:40 +1000, "Jeff R" wrote:

"YOU HAVE TO LIKE IT!"

...which is all I've ever said.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is NOT "all you've ever said." This is another
characteristic of people like you, shared by the others, flamers who deny,
deny, deny what you say and do. Here's what you said, word for word, YOUR
words:

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 09:51:22 +1000

"I consider haggling over the price as akin to begging for spare change at
the railway station.

snipped, many other Gems-from-Jeff

I still think I summed it up best, and more simply, with the label "super
moron". Here, the public record provides more proof that this label fits
like a glove.

Nick

"Nick Knight" wrote in message
...
In , on 06/04/2005

snipped, many other Gems-from-Jeff

I still think I summed it up best, and more simply, with the label "super
moron". Here, the public record provides more proof that this label fits
like a glove.

Nick

Uh-huh.
I don't like haggling, so I'm a super moron.

That just about sums you up, Nick.

--
Jeff R.

Until the shop closed down a few years back, I often visited
a coin shop in Nottingham.

The dealer was a most pleasant individual, and I bought many coins
from him. Very few were at the quoted price, but the offer of
a discount always came from him.

If I liked the price and the coin, a deal was struck. If I
was unhappy at the amount asked, he often had a look at his
code to see what he paid for it, and then a new offer was
made - which was sometimes but not always accepted.

He knew that I only bought good quality material (poor coins
are a false economy) without necessarily demanding mint state
for the early Victorian coins that I was interested in.

As a result we were both happy - his cashflow improved so that
he could buy more nice stuff, and I had nice coins that I
was pleased with and came back for more.

This is the normal buyer-seller relationship where both
parties have got to know each other.

--
Tony Clayton
Coins of the UK : http://www.coinsoftheuk.info
Sent using RISCOS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC
.... A committee has 6 or more legs and no brain.