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

Ancient acquisition



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 13th 10, 01:38 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Scurvy Dog[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Ancient acquisition


"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/12/2010 3:09 PM, Phil DeMayo wrote:

Kiss our collective asses you self-important mutt.


You're the *perfect* spokesperson for this newsgroup, as it is now anyway. You
rarely offer any numismatic content. No wonder you seem to have just appointed
yourself. But no, I will not kiss your posterior or anyone else's. Further, I
will not bite you or any part of you either, no matter how many times you ask
me. You've repeatedly asked others here as well to bite you. I don't know if
anyone has ever consented. What I cannot fathom is how you cannot see how
depraved it is to so publicly solicit these kinds of acts. I try to maintain
an open mind, but I doubt I'm the only one who feels that sado-masochism, at
the very least, should be kept private.


You are such a pompous, humorless twit. g
I don't killfile you because it is just too damn funny watching you get your
comeuppence by every poster.


Ads
  #22  
Old April 13th 10, 04:38 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Reid Goldsborough[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 357
Default Ancient acquisition

On 4/12/2010 8:46 PM, Mr. Jaggers wrote:

"Bite me" is hardly an invitation to sado-masochism. Check a good slang
dictionary for an explanation of the term. By the way, it's been around at
least as far back as my own high school days, back in nineteen mumbly-four.


Yes, that's right. But it's not only his sadomasochistic words, it's
also his actions. Sure, with most people, saying "Bite me!" over and
over and referring to body parts where the sun don't shine would just be
blown off as the actions of an eccentric curmudgeon. What's more, I
don't have any evidence if he engages in sadomasochistic solicitations
in person. But from what I've seen online anyway, he's without question
sadistic in his messaging, or tries to be anyway. More so in the past
than recently, and has been pointed out previously, he seems to relish
the gutter fighting, jumping in whenever he can. Further, his online
masochism is evident in making the same mistakes over and over, in
bringing on the same criticism. I won't repeat all this, not wanting to
kill an almost dead horse. I mention this now because he again is
engaging in the same kinds of behavior, jumping into brawls without any
previous engagement in the conversation and without any knowledge or
interest in the subject matter of the thread.

--

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
  #23  
Old April 13th 10, 04:40 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Reid Goldsborough[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 357
Default Ancient acquisition

On 4/10/2010 4:05 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
Here's my latest:

http://rg.ancients.info/misc/Constantine_II.jpg

There's more to it than meets the eye, in hand as well. If anyone comes
up with the right answer, they win my eternal admiration.


I'll reveal now. Posted this three days ago. Zero coin-related
responses. Not surprised but a bit disappointed. Mr. Jaggers was right
of course about the challenges in generating positive on-topic
discussion in this group, though he seems much more likely now to post
interesting coin content than previously, content that does generate
positive on-topic discussion. I'll probably do a little analysis of the
responses to this thread later, but in short, part of this lack of
content here no doubt is that relatively few of the relatively few
people still here collect and know about ancients compared with U.S. and
other modern coins, though some do. Part of it may be that I posed this
as a challenge. And part of it is that it is indeed difficult if not
impossible to see anything unusual about the above coin, either from the
above photo, not spectacular but typical of online photos/scans of
similar coins, or from looking at the coin in hand.

It's modern. A counterfeit. A very good fake of a very inexpensive coin.
By "good" here I mean not in the sense of moral of course but in the
sense of high-quality, and by high-quality I mean deceptive --
successful in what it attempts to do. This doesn't mean either that
people should avoid collecting ancients. It's just that as with the
Chinese and their faking of American collector coins, including
relatively low-value ones, the Bulgarians are getting better and better
at faking ancient coins. All this, in my view, makes coin collecting
more interesting, not less, if you choose to delve into the area of
authenticity. Lots more detail about the above piece, purportedly a
Constantine II bronze.

--

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
  #24  
Old April 13th 10, 05:05 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Scurvy Dog[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Ancient acquisition


"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
... Further, his online masochism is evident in making the same mistakes over
and over, in bringing on the same criticism...


POT - KETTLE - BLACK


  #25  
Old April 13th 10, 06:52 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Bruce Remick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,391
Default Ancient acquisition


"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/10/2010 4:05 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
Here's my latest:

http://rg.ancients.info/misc/Constantine_II.jpg

There's more to it than meets the eye, in hand as well. If anyone comes
up with the right answer, they win my eternal admiration.


I'll reveal now. Posted this three days ago. Zero coin-related responses.
Not surprised but a bit disappointed. Mr. Jaggers was right of course
about the challenges in generating positive on-topic discussion in this
group, though he seems much more likely now to post interesting coin
content than previously, content that does generate positive on-topic
discussion. I'll probably do a little analysis of the responses to this
thread later, but in short, part of this lack of content here no doubt is
that relatively few of the relatively few people still here collect and
know about ancients compared with U.S. and other modern coins, though some
do. Part of it may be that I posed this as a challenge. And part of it is
that it is indeed difficult if not impossible to see anything unusual
about the above coin, either from the above photo, not spectacular but
typical of online photos/scans of similar coins, or from looking at the
coin in hand.

It's modern. A counterfeit. A very good fake of a very inexpensive coin.
By "good" here I mean not in the sense of moral of course but in the sense
of high-quality, and by high-quality I mean deceptive --
successful in what it attempts to do. This doesn't mean either that people
should avoid collecting ancients. It's just that as with the Chinese and
their faking of American collector coins, including relatively low-value
ones, the Bulgarians are getting better and better at faking ancient
coins. All this, in my view, makes coin collecting more interesting, not
less, if you choose to delve into the area of authenticity. Lots more
detail about the above piece, purportedly a Constantine II bronze.


I think that if you came right out and described it as counterfeit in your
first post, you might have received more responses. Tell us how and why you
identified it as such. Those of us who don't collect ancients probably had
no idea of what might be unusual or "more than meets the eye" about it,
never having seen one before. As a non-collector, so many of the ancient
coins look crudely made to me that I have no basis to question one's
authenticity, especially from a photo.


  #26  
Old April 13th 10, 07:03 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Scurvy Dog[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Ancient acquisition

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...
As a non-collector, so many of the ancient coins look crudely made to me that I
have no basis to question one's authenticity, especially from a photo.

Especially from so crude a photo.
But Reid isn't here for discussion, he's here to pontificate and blow his own
horn, as usual.


  #27  
Old April 13th 10, 08:29 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Mr. Jaggers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,523
Default Ancient acquisition

Reid Goldsborough wrote:
On 4/12/2010 8:46 PM, Mr. Jaggers wrote:

"Bite me" is hardly an invitation to sado-masochism. Check a good
slang dictionary for an explanation of the term. By the way, it's
been around at least as far back as my own high school days, back in
nineteen mumbly-four.


Yes, that's right. But it's not only his sadomasochistic words, it's
also his actions. Sure, with most people, saying "Bite me!" over and
over and referring to body parts where the sun don't shine would just
be blown off as the actions of an eccentric curmudgeon. What's more, I
don't have any evidence if he engages in sadomasochistic solicitations
in person. But from what I've seen online anyway, he's without
question sadistic in his messaging, or tries to be anyway. More so in
the past than recently, and has been pointed out previously, he seems
to relish the gutter fighting, jumping in whenever he can. Further,
his online masochism is evident in making the same mistakes over and
over, in bringing on the same criticism. I won't repeat all this, not
wanting to kill an almost dead horse. I mention this now because he
again is engaging in the same kinds of behavior, jumping into brawls
without any previous engagement in the conversation and without any
knowledge or interest in the subject matter of the thread.


Good grief, all this time I was under the impression that you two disagreed
over the mechanism of whizzing, not S&M.

James de Mistaken


  #28  
Old April 13th 10, 09:34 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
mazorj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,169
Default Ancient acquisition


"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/10/2010 4:05 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
Here's my latest:

http://rg.ancients.info/misc/Constantine_II.jpg

There's more to it than meets the eye, in hand as well. If anyone comes
up with the right answer, they win my eternal admiration.


I'll reveal now. Posted this three days ago. Zero coin-related responses.
Not surprised but a bit disappointed. Mr. Jaggers was right of course
about the challenges in generating positive on-topic discussion in this
group, though he seems much more likely now to post interesting coin
content than previously, content that does generate positive on-topic
discussion. I'll probably do a little analysis of the responses to this
thread later, but in short, part of this lack of content here no doubt is
that relatively few of the relatively few people still here collect and
know about ancients compared with U.S. and other modern coins, though some
do. Part of it may be that I posed this as a challenge. And part of it is
that it is indeed difficult if not impossible to see anything unusual
about the above coin, either from the above photo, not spectacular but
typical of online photos/scans of similar coins, or from looking at the
coin in hand.


Cutting through your blathering, babbling chit-chat, we discover that: You
admit that you posted a crap image of what is an ugly crap coin (and a
counterfeit one at that) from a specialized area of collecting that is far
less familiar to most collectors than, say, old U.S. coppers. And then you
whine because you got very little in the way of substantive responses.

It's modern. A counterfeit. A very good fake of a very inexpensive coin.
By "good" here I mean not in the sense of moral of course but in the sense
of high-quality, and by high-quality I mean deceptive --
successful in what it attempts to do. This doesn't mean either that people
should avoid collecting ancients. It's just that as with the Chinese and
their faking of American collector coins, including relatively low-value
ones, the Bulgarians are getting better and better at faking ancient
coins. All this, in my view, makes coin collecting more interesting, not
less, if you choose to delve into the area of authenticity. Lots more
detail about the above piece, purportedly a Constantine II bronze.


Cutting through your blathering, babbling chit-chat, we discover that: You
are fascinated with coins that are not real coins, but counterfeits of
foreign coins that most collectors will never see even in image form, let
alone possess. Nothing wrong with that... except that you dissed James for
his equally detailed knowledge - down to die marriages! - of real, actual
19th century U.S. copper coins that every collector can readily see and buy
at coin shows and local shops. Even if they're not in the market for one,
they at least know of them from the pages of the Red Book.

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then you really ought to see a
doctor about your chronic binocular conjunctivitis.

To keep my post on topic, and since you like numismatic challenges, I have
one for you, Reid. Here is an image of a coin in my possession:

O

Here is the reverse side...

Q

and the edge view,

[||||||]

I know the image quality isn't the best, but I'm hoping that a collector
with your vast detailed knowledge
can ascertain its type, spot the anomalies on it, and tell me whether it's a
counterfeit or a unique find or just a common variety. If you can't provide
a substantive response, well, then we'll know that you're just a poseur
who's here for the chit-chat.

- mazorj, Numismatic Quiz Master

  #29  
Old April 13th 10, 10:26 PM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Scurvy Dog[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Ancient acquisition


"mazorj" wrote in message
...

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/10/2010 4:05 PM, Reid Goldsborough wrote:
Here's my latest:

http://rg.ancients.info/misc/Constantine_II.jpg

There's more to it than meets the eye, in hand as well. If anyone comes
up with the right answer, they win my eternal admiration.


I'll reveal now. Posted this three days ago. Zero coin-related responses. Not
surprised but a bit disappointed. Mr. Jaggers was right of course about the
challenges in generating positive on-topic discussion in this group, though
he seems much more likely now to post interesting coin content than
previously, content that does generate positive on-topic discussion. I'll
probably do a little analysis of the responses to this thread later, but in
short, part of this lack of content here no doubt is that relatively few of
the relatively few people still here collect and know about ancients compared
with U.S. and other modern coins, though some do. Part of it may be that I
posed this as a challenge. And part of it is that it is indeed difficult if
not impossible to see anything unusual about the above coin, either from the
above photo, not spectacular but typical of online photos/scans of similar
coins, or from looking at the coin in hand.


Cutting through your blathering, babbling chit-chat, we discover that: You
admit that you posted a crap image of what is an ugly crap coin (and a
counterfeit one at that) from a specialized area of collecting that is far
less familiar to most collectors than, say, old U.S. coppers. And then you
whine because you got very little in the way of substantive responses.

It's modern. A counterfeit. A very good fake of a very inexpensive coin. By
"good" here I mean not in the sense of moral of course but in the sense of
high-quality, and by high-quality I mean deceptive --
successful in what it attempts to do. This doesn't mean either that people
should avoid collecting ancients. It's just that as with the Chinese and
their faking of American collector coins, including relatively low-value
ones, the Bulgarians are getting better and better at faking ancient coins.
All this, in my view, makes coin collecting more interesting, not less, if
you choose to delve into the area of authenticity. Lots more detail about the
above piece, purportedly a Constantine II bronze.


Cutting through your blathering, babbling chit-chat, we discover that: You
are fascinated with coins that are not real coins, but counterfeits of foreign
coins that most collectors will never see even in image form, let alone
possess. Nothing wrong with that... except that you dissed James for his
equally detailed knowledge - down to die marriages! - of real, actual 19th
century U.S. copper coins that every collector can readily see and buy at coin
shows and local shops. Even if they're not in the market for one, they at
least know of them from the pages of the Red Book.

If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then you really ought to see a doctor
about your chronic binocular conjunctivitis.

To keep my post on topic, and since you like numismatic challenges, I have one
for you, Reid. Here is an image of a coin in my possession:

O

Here is the reverse side...

Q

and the edge view,

[||||||]

I know the image quality isn't the best, but I'm hoping that a collector with
your vast detailed knowledge
can ascertain its type, spot the anomalies on it, and tell me whether it's a
counterfeit or a unique find or just a common variety. If you can't provide a
substantive response, well, then we'll know that you're just a poseur who's
here for the chit-chat.

- mazorj, Numismatic Quiz Master


You forget, you must add g to your response.


  #30  
Old April 14th 10, 01:06 AM posted to rec.collecting.coins
Jud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,215
Default Ancient acquisition

On Apr 13, 4:34*pm, "mazorj" wrote:

To keep my post on topic, and since you like numismatic challenges, I have
one for you, Reid. *Here is an image of a coin in my possession:

O

Here is the reverse side...

Q

and the edge view,

[||||||]

I know the image quality isn't the best, but I'm hoping that a collector
with your vast detailed knowledge
can ascertain its type, spot the anomalies on it, and tell me whether it's a
counterfeit or a unique find or just a common variety. *If you can't provide
a substantive response, well, then we'll know that you're just a poseur
who's here for the chit-chat.

- mazorj, Numismatic Quiz Master


I hope someone can identify this coin, because I have one just like
it! 8-)



 




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
My latest coin acquisition Mr. Jaggers Coins 16 April 11th 10 12:20 AM
Latest Acquisition RWF Books 0 March 24th 09 01:13 PM
A nice acquisition Francis A. Miniter[_2_] Books 7 March 17th 08 04:46 AM
Recent Acquisition: Bambi Francis A. Miniter Books 0 October 29th 07 02:35 AM
Seeburg 201 acquisition questions [email protected] Juke Boxes 2 August 31st 04 02:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:44 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.