Well, that's "interesting." A post this morning, by a person (presumably) with a grand total of one post on this forum, but who is now banned, which post is incoherent.
@124Spider said:
Well, that's "interesting." A post this morning, by a person (presumably) with a grand total of one post on this forum, but who is now banned, which post is incoherent.
I'm assuming it's a duplicate profile, nothing seemed that offensive, but who knows.
Not incoherent though. Seems like they were upset that PCGS was unwilling to authenticate the coin but that ANACS was.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
I swear, I recall seeing this coin and the story of it being dug from the ground here on this forum not too terribly long ago.
I wonder if that member was banned and so subsequently this "new" member (same guy) was banned because of the previous band and PCGS policy not to invent yourself into a new handle.
Well, he is showing enough images on Ebay so he is not trying to hide something. As @jmlanzaf, says the coin would by worth more if it had been crossed at any grade into a PCGS slab.
But on ebay he shows it both inside and outside of the slab with no explanation about its current status, and he does not mention that PCGS was unable to authenticate it.
I don't have an issue with how it is being offered on ebay. The images are clear, there is a return allowed policy, the story is believable and the coin is still in the ANACS holder (as far as I know).
@Insider3 said:
Well, he is showing enough images on Ebay so he is not trying to hide something. As @jmlanzaf, says the coin would by worth more if it had been crossed at any grade into a PCGS slab.
PCGS originally was unable to authenticate so he sent it to ANACS. I generally feel ANACS is good at authentication. It is what it is. If you go to the original thread, it had more pictures and the weight.
The OP got the result he was looking for from ANACS, I guess he is still butt-hurt from spending the grading fees at PCGS. Now he wants problem-free money ($2,500 in the ebay auction) for a problem coin, which he is unlikely to get.
@sellitstore said:
A TPG should refuse to authenticate if there is any doubt and PCGS did this.
This is a rare occurrence, as it should be.
I should hope so! Fifty years ago and up to the mid-80's authenticators were allowed to hold coins they were not sure about until they reached an opinion. Nevertheless, some coins were sent back uncertified due to divided opinions. After the mid-80's, there was pressure to reach a quick decision on authentication. .
The pictures in that eBay listing are vary, very strange.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
00Digger
Posts: 1 ✭
Comments
Well, that's "interesting." A post this morning, by a person (presumably) with a grand total of one post on this forum, but who is now banned, which post is incoherent.
I'm assuming it's a duplicate profile, nothing seemed that offensive, but who knows.
Not incoherent though. Seems like they were upset that PCGS was unwilling to authenticate the coin but that ANACS was.
That's gotta be a record...banned in 1 post
The photos were good, and told a story.
The moral is:
Experts often disagree.
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!
But who is correct?
It looks like this coin is currently on eBay
https://ebay.com/itm/186314006263
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
Assuming that the guess is correct, and OP was wondering why PCGS wouldn't authenticate while ANACS would....
It could be that both are correct: PCGS was unable to authenticate, while ANACS was able to authenticate.
I swear, I recall seeing this coin and the story of it being dug from the ground here on this forum not too terribly long ago.
I wonder if that member was banned and so subsequently this "new" member (same guy) was banned because of the previous band and PCGS policy not to invent yourself into a new handle.
peacockcoins
Found it:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1094509/1801-draped-bust-dime/p1
peacockcoins
@braddick - You nailed that coffin shut!! 👍🏻
Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )
Crack out: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes!
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Well, he is showing enough images on Ebay so he is not trying to hide something. As @jmlanzaf, says the coin would by worth more if it had been crossed at any grade into a PCGS slab.
But on ebay he shows it both inside and outside of the slab with no explanation about its current status, and he does not mention that PCGS was unable to authenticate it.
I don't have an issue with how it is being offered on ebay. The images are clear, there is a return allowed policy, the story is believable and the coin is still in the ANACS holder (as far as I know).
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
How do you know he got banned?
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
If you click on the user name it takes you to their page where it says "Banned" underneath the name.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Thanks TomB
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
I clicked on his user name and it doesn't say banned although his avatar shows the banned avatar. Very strange.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
PCGS originally was unable to authenticate so he sent it to ANACS. I generally feel ANACS is good at authentication. It is what it is. If you go to the original thread, it had more pictures and the weight.
The OP got the result he was looking for from ANACS, I guess he is still butt-hurt from spending the grading fees at PCGS. Now he wants problem-free money ($2,500 in the ebay auction) for a problem coin, which he is unlikely to get.
From what I can see in his pics, I think ANACS nailed it. Of course, his ask price may be unrealistic for this coin.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
A TPG should refuse to authenticate if there is any doubt and PCGS did this.
This is a rare occurrence, as it should be.
I should hope so! Fifty years ago and up to the mid-80's authenticators were allowed to hold coins they were not sure about until they reached an opinion. Nevertheless, some coins were sent back uncertified due to divided opinions. After the mid-80's, there was pressure to reach a quick decision on authentication. .
I am not, repeat NOT, disputing what you saw.
That said, it currently says banned.
Perhaps the avatar indicates banned faster than the status banner does.
It said "Banned" last night, too, when I posted to the thread. However, it can be easily missed with the other blocks of text around it.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
The pictures in that eBay listing are vary, very strange.