Multiples of same sets

CollectorBonEZ

Would it be wrong or unfair to others to upload multiples of the same set, if you've already got the top set?

DIMEMAN

I don't care for that either, but it's not against the rules.

savitale

I don’t see why it would be unfair. If you have the #1 and #2 ranked set, go ahead and put them both up. You might be a bit obsessed, but that’s a different issue.

DIMEMAN

@savitale said:
I don’t see why it would be unfair. If you have the #1 and #2 ranked set, go ahead and put them both up. You might be a bit obsessed, but that’s a different issue.

The thing is...D.L. Hanson could go out and buy enough top grade Mercury's and Roosevelt's to have the top 50 in each set if he wanted to. And while there is no rule against that....to me that would just be showing off.

Goldminers

When I have a few duplicate #1 modern sets, I usually only publish one of the larger ones, but keep the other #1 subsets in my inventory unpublished for my record keeping.

I feel better letting others participate and I enjoy seeing the work they have done to get a nice set, too.

remumc

I think as a common courtesy, you should only publish your top set in any series, especially when you are talking the top 5 current sets. You have to have a top 5 set to get it pedigreed, & I sure others would like a chance to get their sets pedigreed.

dbldie55

Not a problem. I know in at least one set, one person has multiple straight grade sets (all coins in the set the same grade). I think it is kind of cool.

I have my AU58 set listed in the regular set along with my mint state set. Of course, it is well down the list so one one would even notice

ms70

Old thread but current issue. It's not right to hog multiple top positions. Everyone likes to show off a set but knocking people out of the top five "All-Time Finest" positions with multiple sets is completely selfish.

Jimnight

As said ... it's not against the rules