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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
In the column Numismatic Ethics the authors talk about the legalities of
owning, buying, and selling counterfeits of collectable coins. At least two people here have argued for years that this is illegal and unethical, one by playing lawyer, amateurishly combining unrelated statutes. The authors of this Numismatist column judiciously point out that the legality of selling and owning counterfeits are confusing but "The coins are legal to own as long as they are offered as contemporary counterfeits and not sold with the intent to defraud." They also point to a recently published book on the subject of counterfeit Bust halves, available to borrow from the ANA library. I pointed out previously the availablilty from the ANA library of the video by Red Book editor and former ANA president Ken Bressett titled "Famous Fakes and Fakers" on the attraction of collecting counterfeits. Lawyer Michael Benveniste previously pointed out here that at least two circuit courts have ruled that possession of counterfeit coins without intent to defraud doesn't violate the U.S. counterfeit statues (United States v. Cardillo, 708 F.2d 29 [1983], and United States v. Ratner, 464 F.2d 169 [1972]). Those with entrenched views will likely still argue about the illegality and immorality of anything and everything having to do with counterfeits even to the extent of equating the collecting and studying of counterfeits with the support of international terrorism, to name just one of the mind-boggling statements made here and that will no doubt continue to be made. The common theme in all this: the interplay of truth and misinformation, a key and fascinating issue in numismatics. -- Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
In , on
12/02/2009 at 06:17 PM, " said: to be sifting through eBay auctions, and always needing to add "- replica -copy -token -mini" Collectable counterfeits are none of these. In this context, they are coins meant to circulate at the time the copied coin was "current". While I don't expect everyone to be interested in these (and fine with as little competition as possible for these rare pieces), many are. Here are some examples from my own personal collection of Bogus Bust Halves (and note how many of these would have a tough time getting sold as genuine): http://www.mr2ice.com/coins/bogos/BogoList.html The 1802 and 1816 are more modern "alterations" and not in the same spirit of the other contemporary pieces. Interesting (to me), none-the-less. Nick |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
Reid Goldsborough wrote:
In the column Numismatic Ethics the authors talk about the legalities of owning, buying, and selling counterfeits of collectable coins. At least two people here have argued for years that this is illegal and unethical, one by playing lawyer, amateurishly combining unrelated statutes. The authors of this Numismatist column judiciously point out that the legality of selling and owning counterfeits are confusing but "The coins are legal to own as long as they are offered as contemporary counterfeits and not sold with the intent to defraud." They also point to a recently published book on the subject of counterfeit Bust halves, available to borrow from the ANA library. I pointed out previously the availablilty from the ANA library of the video by Red Book editor and former ANA president Ken Bressett titled "Famous Fakes and Fakers" on the attraction of collecting counterfeits. Lawyer Michael Benveniste previously pointed out here that at least two circuit courts have ruled that possession of counterfeit coins without intent to defraud doesn't violate the U.S. counterfeit statues (United States v. Cardillo, 708 F.2d 29 [1983], and United States v. Ratner, 464 F.2d 169 [1972]). Those with entrenched views will likely still argue about the illegality and immorality of anything and everything having to do with counterfeits even to the extent of equating the collecting and studying of counterfeits with the support of international terrorism, to name just one of the mind-boggling statements made here and that will no doubt continue to be made. The common theme in all this: the interplay of truth and misinformation, a key and fascinating issue in numismatics. While I concur with your positions regarding PCV, whizzing, and collecting counterfeits, which you review in this recent trio of posts, I fail to see the educational value in all-of-a-sudden taking potshots at rcc people who have differed with you in the past. You yourself once observed that many rcc regulars have dropped out because of what goes on here, but now, here you are again, using condescending expressions such as "amateurish", "playing lawyer", "whiz", and "metal shop guru" to refer to your past opponents. Are you incapable of building yourself up without tearing others down? James |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
While I concur with your positions regarding PCV, whizzing, and collecting counterfeits, which you review in this recent trio of posts, I fail to see the educational value in all-of-a-sudden taking potshots at rcc people I didn't mention a single name. I focused on the issues (coin holders, coin doctoring, and counterfeit collecting) and the behavior (how truth gets compromised and misinformation gets spread). I'd suggest that one core reason that RCC is such a small shadow of what it used to be, along with the anonymous flamers, is the spew of off-topic chitchatting with virtually every thread that very quickly steers it from a discussion of numismatic substance into whatever somebody like you wants to chitchat about. Typically people like this carelessly just quote the entire thread before adding their chitchat at the end, which forces scrolling and makes it tedious for others to see if there's anything worth following. So they stop following. Threads degenerate as much from this as from flaming. This is not to say that digression and tangents should be outlawed or whatever. Free world and all. In the best moderated discussion groups chitchatty digression is controlled by gentle persuasion and tactful interjections. This doesn't work, for the most part, in unmoderated groups, with people just ignoring this. Another key reason for RCC's decline is the decline of Usenet in general and the discontinuation of Usenet feeds by major ISPs, though all other things being equal there are fairly easy work-arounds for this. -- Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
wrote:
My two cents: I want the real thing. I don't care about the ethics or the legality of the situation; I don't want them. Period. End of sentence. It's such a pain to be sifting through eBay auctions, and always needing to add "- replica -copy -token -mini" to all of my queries in order to weed out all of the ersatz items and get to the actual coins. A much bigger problem than copies sold as copies is copies sold as authentic. g I don't think there are that many copies sold as copies in relation to authentic coins. But the blatant forgery scams on eBay remain a big problem. I follow these crooks who sell, without exaggeration, thousands of fakes as authentic, for years. Maybe the single worst area here on eBay is antiquities. It's so easy to fool people with this stuff. Sure, you can say, A fool and his money... and all that. But the reality is that these forgery crooks get away with it. The solution, right now, is to never buy stuff like this from eBay sellers you don't know or who haven't been recommended to you by reliable sources if you don't have expertise is the type of item and the ways of eBay. Only a partial solution... -- Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
Reid Goldsborough wrote:
While I concur with your positions regarding PCV, whizzing, and collecting counterfeits, which you review in this recent trio of posts, I fail to see the educational value in all-of-a-sudden taking potshots at rcc people I didn't mention a single name. I focused on the issues (coin holders, coin doctoring, and counterfeit collecting) and the behavior (how truth gets compromised and misinformation gets spread). I'd suggest that one core reason that RCC is such a small shadow of what it used to be, along with the anonymous flamers, is the spew of off-topic chitchatting with virtually every thread that very quickly steers it from a discussion of numismatic substance into whatever somebody like you wants to chitchat about. Typically people like this carelessly just quote the entire thread before adding their chitchat at the end, which forces scrolling and makes it tedious for others to see if there's anything worth following. So they stop following. Threads degenerate as much from this as from flaming. This is not to say that digression and tangents should be outlawed or whatever. Free world and all. In the best moderated discussion groups chitchatty digression is controlled by gentle persuasion and tactful interjections. This doesn't work, for the most part, in unmoderated groups, with people just ignoring this. Another key reason for RCC's decline is the decline of Usenet in general and the discontinuation of Usenet feeds by major ISPs, though all other things being equal there are fairly easy work-arounds for this. Of course you didn't mention a single name. But I know of only one person who fits the description of "metal shop" and that discussion ended over two years ago. It should have remained that way, but you had to dredge it up all over again, complete with unnecessary and patronizing name-calling. It is no coincidence that that same person is now embroiled with you again. I don't blame him a bit for striking back. As for focusing on the issues, please explain why you then bring personalities into the picture with your adjectival characterisations of people who hold views contrary to your own. When you do this, it says to me that your views and your positions cannot stand on their own merit. Finally, if you have a problem with my or anyone else's off-topic chitchatting, well, there just aren't enough hardcore coin topics brought up to make the newsgroup more coinworthy. The idle chitchat and sometimes licentious banter serve to cement individuals together and make them more human, not just members of a panel discussion. I've been around here for several years, and during that time there has always been plenty of OT material. It's just part of the rcc deal. I have to assume that everyone here is eminently capable of ignoring or plonking the offending parties, if it has to come to that. Tired of the anonymous flamers? Same comments apply. James |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
In , on 12/03/2009
at 01:40 PM, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com said: The idle chitchat and sometimes licentious banter serve to cement individuals together and make them more human, not just members of a panel discussion. I've been around here for several years, and during that time there has always been plenty of OT material. Sheesh. And there will always be plenty of crime. The quantity doesn't make it right, or desirable. That can't be used as an excuse to create more crime. Sorry, Reid has hit it smack on the head. I could start posting about my nose hairs, or select a more dazzlingly disgusting topic, and I'm sure I could get some replies brewing. How thrilling that would be. There's no reason to bump up the volume with off topic garbage. And that's what the majority of threads end up being. Usually, 2 people (sometimes 3) talking amongst themselves about nothing coin related. That's what email is for. Nick |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... Reid Goldsborough wrote: While I concur with your positions regarding PCV, whizzing, and collecting counterfeits, which you review in this recent trio of posts, I fail to see the educational value in all-of-a-sudden taking potshots at rcc people I didn't mention a single name. I focused on the issues (coin holders, coin doctoring, and counterfeit collecting) and the behavior (how truth gets compromised and misinformation gets spread). I'd suggest that one core reason that RCC is such a small shadow of what it used to be, along with the anonymous flamers, is the spew of off-topic chitchatting with virtually every thread that very quickly steers it from a discussion of numismatic substance into whatever somebody like you wants to chitchat about. Typically people like this carelessly just quote the entire thread before adding their chitchat at the end, which forces scrolling and makes it tedious for others to see if there's anything worth following. So they stop following. Threads degenerate as much from this as from flaming. This is not to say that digression and tangents should be outlawed or whatever. Free world and all. In the best moderated discussion groups chitchatty digression is controlled by gentle persuasion and tactful interjections. This doesn't work, for the most part, in unmoderated groups, with people just ignoring this. Another key reason for RCC's decline is the decline of Usenet in general and the discontinuation of Usenet feeds by major ISPs, though all other things being equal there are fairly easy work-arounds for this. I don't know enough of the posting history here to comment on James' points, but after 26 years on Internet forums and newsgroups, I do know enough to take issue with some of your (Reid's) views on r.c.c. as an ongoing froup. You have cited the standard explanations for why a particular newsgroup would go into apparent decline. They're logical and valid up to a point. But only up to a point because there's something missing. I have a few ideas on the missing "X Factor" that I'll get to later. First, let me give you a contrasting situation by pointing you to the newsgroup rec.arts.sf.written, which I only recently began following. It is chartered for a subject that is at least as narrow as numismatics. Arguably it is even a much more narrow area of interest than coin collecting. Who reads any books these days, let alone SF? Its title does not invite kooks and ******s in the way that newsgroups such as alt.paranoia and alt.politics do. But unlike r.c.c., it averages 300-400 posts a day. Most threads start out as being on topic, but not surprisingly they soon wander off into educated, animated discussions (with the occasional flame war) on tangential topics. Oddly enough, only 2-4 of the hundreds of daily posts are new threads. The rest are all those lively, generally interesting, generally educated, continuing discussions of OT topics. They go on and on because they attract participants and keep them coming back to r.a.s.w. For the record, r.a.s.w. suffers from all the "defects" that you cite as the downfall of r.c.c. So why 300-400 posts a day - which also runs counter to your logical but insufficient observation on the general decline of Usenet - versus the r.c.c. traffic of a few dozen posts? Also for the record, in the 2+ years that I've been a subscriber, r.c.c. hasn't exactly been a magnet for drive-by kooks and flamers. There have been a few, and we do have a few intermittently abusive regulars, but you'd have to be pretty thin-skinned to let that bother you. If r.c.c. in its current relatively pest-free condition (knock on wood) isn't bringing back the old crowd, then it's got to be something else that's keeping r.c.c. from being "appointment Internet" for them. Also for the record, part of the explanation for r.a.s.w.'s popularity does lie in the subject matter. "Real" SF is the literature of ideas. So naturally, any newsgroup on SF books will initially attract more of the articulate thinkers who like to kick ideas around. But attracting is one thing, keeping them is another. If r.a.s.w. stuck strictly to its chartered topic, my guess is that its traffic would be at or even below the level of r.c.c. Written SF is the meat and potatoes of r.a.s.w. but there also is a "special sauce" that keeps them coming back for more. The "special sauce" is intelligent, articulate discussion of OT spin-offs that invite participation by others. If it were not for a few of the regulars here who enjoy OT, r.c.c. would offer little more than a palid pedestrian diet of plain coin talk, strictly meat and potatoes without any sauce. Even with the few inveterate, incorrigible OT'ers we do have, r.c.c. is hardly a Grand Central Station for lively Internet discussion. The original dot-com entrepreneurs mostly went bust with their goofy "new economics" business models but they were at least partly right in one respect: On the Internet, survival does depend on attracting the eyeballs. And that requires content, be it products, services, or interesting reading. You know and admit that OT has a place as part of the glue that binds participants together, and conversely as the grease that that keeps the newsgroup machinery humming. Yet... your admissions do not obscure the fact that you are bringing this up as a thinly disguised whine. If OT really doesn't bother you (which I doubt) then just shut up about it. If it does bother you, then shut up and either learn to skim and skip without rancor the way most of us do, or beef up your killfile until you can only see the handful of posters who never go OT. And please, stop limiting yourself to the same litany of necessary but not sufficient reasons for why r.c.c. isn't the r.a.s.w. of coin collecting. There's more to it than that - and at least some of the "more" is the need for more of the very OT component that you bemoan. I'm have no history with you and I'm not trying to dump on you, Reid. If anything, I read and enjoy some of your specialized mini-essays here. But you're way out in left field with your complaining about OT and with your limited explanations for why r.c.c. is not a powerhouse newsgroup. We have met the enemy and he is us. - mazorj "Admonishments written while you wait." |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
Nick Knight wrote:
In , on 12/03/2009 at 01:40 PM, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com said: The idle chitchat and sometimes licentious banter serve to cement individuals together and make them more human, not just members of a panel discussion. I've been around here for several years, and during that time there has always been plenty of OT material. Sheesh. And there will always be plenty of crime. The quantity doesn't make it right, or desirable. That can't be used as an excuse to create more crime. Sorry, Reid has hit it smack on the head. I could start posting about my nose hairs, or select a more dazzlingly disgusting topic, and I'm sure I could get some replies brewing. How thrilling that would be. There's no reason to bump up the volume with off topic garbage. And that's what the majority of threads end up being. Usually, 2 people (sometimes 3) talking amongst themselves about nothing coin related. That's what email is for. Goodness, Nick, by posting as you just did, you have engaged in the very activity that you condemn. In my view, a person with only one dimension, whatever it may be, is not a person I'd care to hang with for very long. Unless that one dimension happened to be beer, he'd be a pretty lonely guy in most any crowd. Call off-topic conversations garbage if you wish, but they are a necessary component of human interaction. You do desire to interact with humans and not automatons, I presume. James |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Numismatist on owning counterfeits
"Nick Knight" wrote in message ... In , on 12/03/2009 at 01:40 PM, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com said: The idle chitchat and sometimes licentious banter serve to cement individuals together and make them more human, not just members of a panel discussion. I've been around here for several years, and during that time there has always been plenty of OT material. Sheesh. And there will always be plenty of crime. The quantity doesn't make it right, or desirable. That can't be used as an excuse to create more crime. No, but maybe you can accept crime as inevitable. The *quality* of the crime might make it more desirable to read about. At least if crime bothers you, there are places you can live and measures you can take to minimize the threat. If off-topic posts on RCC really bother you that much, ditto. I don't recall very many original OT posts that went very far. Mostly the coin-related posts wander into OT, once the original subject has been covered by those few who care. Often, lurkers who might have had some relevant input don't join the fray until the OT portion heats up. Human nature, I guess. Sorry, Reid has hit it smack on the head. I could start posting about my nose hairs, or select a more dazzlingly disgusting topic, and I'm sure I could get some replies brewing. How thrilling that would be. Maybe. Maybe not. Fortunately, the future of RCC doesn't depend on your input. There's no reason to bump up the volume with off topic garbage. And that's what the majority of threads end up being. Usually, 2 people (sometimes 3) talking amongst themselves about nothing coin related. That's what email is for. Hey, the end of a delicious ice cream cone is a dry crackery thingy, but most people finish it without complaining. If you want to see more coin discussion, start some coin-specific posts. If others are interested, you'll have the satisfaction you desire. If you don't want to stay aboard when the thread drifts off topic, you can at least have the satisfaction that you started it. Here I thought Usenet also was a place where two or three people could "talk" amongst themselves about things that were or were not coin-related, with the understanding that others monitoring the group were free to join in the fun. Can't do that with email. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Owning a 1,000 Ounce Silver Bar | [email protected] | Coins | 5 | February 2nd 09 09:34 PM |
Counterfeits | don't look | Coins | 1 | December 22nd 07 09:12 PM |
Owning the Coins of Alexander | Jorg Lueke | Coins | 3 | November 18th 04 10:37 PM |
Die struck counterfeits | James McCown | Coins | 13 | October 11th 04 05:01 PM |
Counterfeits: What was done | Reid Goldsborough | Coins | 35 | August 4th 03 10:25 PM |