Rockport Indiana So-Called Dollar?

WindycityWindycity Posts: 3,047 ✭✭✭
Any help understanding this is apprecaited. Assume it would be called a so-called dollar but can find much else about it.

image
image
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website

Comments

  • derrybderryb Posts: 26,835 ✭✭✭✭✭
    medallion?

    All debt-based consumption steals from the future to gratify the present. It is tomorrow’s consumption pulled forward. It signs a perpetual check against an overdrawn future.

  • WindycityWindycity Posts: 3,047 ✭✭✭
    Try this for the night crowd. Anyone recognize it?
    <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website
  • LotsoLuckLotsoLuck Posts: 3,786 ✭✭✭
    Not a SCD.
  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Not a SCD. >>



    Why not? Is it too small (<33mm) or some other reason?

    If it fits the general guidelines outlined by HK, I have no problem calling medals not in the books as "Unlisted SCDs" as seems common to do.
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,247 ✭✭✭✭
    With a bale permanently affixed to this piece, it will never be more than a key or watch fob. It appears as though this is as made, so it would never be considered even if the bale were expertly removed. Medals issued as milestone events must be for an event that would be considered of national interest, or have much greater historical perspective than an obscure county centennial of founding to fit into the concept of SoCalled Dollars that Hibler and Kappen desired.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • LotsoLuckLotsoLuck Posts: 3,786 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Not a SCD. >>



    Why not? Is it too small (<33mm) or some other reason?

    If it fits the general guidelines outlined by HK, I have no problem calling medals not in the books as "Unlisted SCDs" as seems common to do. >>




    Didnt find it in the Hibler Kappen SC$ book, other then that I dont know "why not"
  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>With a bale permanently affixed to this piece, it will never be more than a key or watch fob. It appears as though this is as made, so it would never be considered even if the bale were expertly removed. >>



    I'm not sure I agree with this. HK mentioned they placed limits on what was included in their book to reduce the amount of work, not because they considered items not listed unqualified to be SCDs. For example, while their guideline #4 mentioned "No holed or looped material unless struck plain also." they also noted there were exceptions to this rule. Under ideal circumstances, if they catalogued some items that violated guideline #4, if they had more time and resources, they would have presumably cataloged more.



    << <i>Medals issued as milestone events must be for an event that would be considered of national interest, or have much greater historical perspective than an obscure county centennial of founding to fit into the concept of SoCalled Dollars that Hibler and Kappen desired. >>



    I'm not sure I agree with this either. There seem to be many HK-listed SCDs of interest primarily at a local level. For example, HK-599: City of Middletown Centennial:

    imageimage

    There are numerous examples:

    HK-598: Charlotte, NC Fireman's Monument
    HK-612: Seneca Falls, NY Centennial
    HK-615: Fayetteville, NC Centennial
    HK-617: Allegheny City Semicentennial
    HK-625: Buncombe County Centennial
    HK-631: Cazenovia, NY Centennial

    In general, I prefer to use the term SCD for anything that fits their general guidelines and is similar to items they included. And since the guidelines were used to reduce the amount of work, if they had unlimited resources, presumably, they would have cataloged all pieces similar to ones they did catalog. It seems with today's technology, it would be possible to create an online website that could use crowd sourcing so it would not be as limiting as the books.

    Generally, I prefer to label items listed in HK as "in HK" and items similar to items in HK as SCDs. This is similar to saying whether a coin is listed in the Red Book or not. For example, if a coin isn't listed in the Red Book, people would generally say it's a coin not listed in the Red Book, and not that it's not a coin.

    Just my thoughts.
  • jedmjedm Posts: 1,437 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A watch fob by any other name still looks like a watch fob. image
  • WindycityWindycity Posts: 3,047 ✭✭✭
    I posted images of the one with the bale but I have another from the same collection which is as issued and in much better shape. I will posted images of that later. Again, appreciate the help.
    <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website
  • jfoot13jfoot13 Posts: 2,483 ✭✭✭
    rich hartshog or something like that is pretty well versed in Rockport In medals and tokens. I know he has a web site but I don't know it off hand as I'm on the road right now

    I did a google and got a so called dollar image site with a silver plated one



    If you can't swim you better stay in the boat.......
  • tmot99tmot99 Posts: 5,296
    Lots of mis-information going out there.

    Hibler-Kappen limited their scope of medals in order to set their definition of a "so-called dollar". One of those criteria is that no loop be attached unless a non-looped piece also existed. They didn't limit just to reduce how many medals were in the book, but to define what they were working on.

    You can go ahead and write your own definitions if you like, but that doesn't mean that your definition is better. I tend to go with the guys that started it with Kenney and H&K.



    << <i>If it fits the general guidelines outlined by HK, I have no problem calling medals not in the books as "Unlisted SCDs" as seems common to do. >>



    Just because scammers on ebay want to use this term, doesn't mean it is common. Heck, you may as well call a dime an "Unlisted SCD" because it isn't listed there. That doesn't make it a SCD. I've seen items of all kinds listed as "Unlisted SCDs" that do not qualify to the H&K definitions under more than one category. Specifically, this medal does NOT meet the general guidelines outlined by H&K.

    That is not to say that there aren't items out there that DO meet the H&K definition and are not listed in the book, either first or second edition. Just from the Columbian Expo, I bet that I can add well over 100 new medals to the SCD book.
  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 15, 2019 4:57PM
    > @jfoot13 said:
    > rich hartshog or something like that is pretty well versed in Rockport In medals and tokens. I know he has a web site but I don't know it off hand as I'm on the road right now
    >
    > I did a google and got a so called dollar image site with a silver plated one


    Good thinking jfoot13. You're thinking of Rich Hartzog who runs AAA Historical Americana - World Exonumia and exonumia.com.

    John Raymond of SoCalledDollar.com lists the OP's piece and calls it an unlisted SCD:

    137) "Spencer County Centennial / Lincoln Splitting Rails", Probably very rare. Silverplated 38.2mm.


  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Specifically, this medal does NOT meet the general guidelines outlined by H&K. >>

    Which guidelines does it not meet?

    It looks pretty good to me (and John Raymond):

    <<
    1) United States only.
    2) Minimum diameter - Size 21 (1-5/16 inch or 33mm).
    3) Maximum diameter - Size 28 (1-3/4 inch or 45mm); but silver Bryan Dollars are listed.
    4) No holed or looped material unless struck plain also. Our Nos. 1 through 3 are the sole exceptions.
    5) No plastic, fiber or similar material unless issued also in one or more metals.
    6) No purely presidential or political medals.
    7) No school, college or athletic medals; no coin club or U.S. Armed Forces medals.
    8) No calendar or store cards; no trade tokens or emergency money.
    >>


    Immediately above this, Hibler and Kappen state "it was necessary to establish the following specific limitations in order to contain our efforts within a manageable perimeter" which seems to imply it was done to reduce the number of medals in the book.

    I use H&K's definition for SCDs so I'm interested to know the parts you are relying on for your interpretation.
  • coinsarefuncoinsarefun Posts: 17,784 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Zoins said:

    There seem to be many HK-listed SCDs of interest primarily at a local level. For example, HK-599: City of Middletown Centennial:

    .
    .
    .
    Here is one of the HK-599A white metal & is fully proof like according to some primary searches it may appear that less than 75 of the exist.
    Although local I love design and when first looked at it the sun behind the mountain with rays remind me of a few early coins.
    .
    .

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Zoins said:
    You're thinking of Rich Hartzog who runs AAA Historical Americana - World Exonumia and exonumia.com.

    Very sad that Rich passed away in 2017. He had an extensive So-Called Dollar collection. I have one of his So-Called Dollars and a store card also.

    Is there any record of his collection?

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 15, 2019 5:02PM

    @coinsarefun said:

    @Zoins said:
    [...]
    There seem to be many HK-listed SCDs of interest primarily at a local level. For example, HK-599: City of Middletown Centennial:
    [...]

    Here is one of the HK-599A white metal & is fully proof like according to some primary searches it may appear that less than 75 of the exist.
    Although local I love design and when first looked at it the sun behind the mountain with rays remind me of a few early coins.

    Nice Stef! I love the look of yours. I'm especially a fan of the old pictorial medals showing everyday working scenes like yours. Thanks for posting it.

  • keetskeets Posts: 20,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    and the debate continues with member Zoins wanting to include anything and everything in a listing as a SC$. consider your interpretation below:
    Under ideal circumstances, if they catalogued some items that violated guideline #4, if they had more time and resources, they would have presumably cataloged more.
    --- my presumption, based on the scope of their work, is that they did in fact "catalogue" many, many items which didn't necessarily fit into what they were trying to accomplish. seeing the sheer number of those medals they were excluded, not because they didn't have the time to track them down, but because they did locate them and they didn't meet their criteria at the time. they most likely didn't see a need to prove the negative, to prove that no unlooped medals existed

    several members were involved in the 2nd Edition. they included some new listings and chose not to include the many others they were aware of that you would insist are SC$'s. I accept that there are some new discoveries that should be considered but that should probably be left to someone who is working on a perhaps 3rd Edition. Jeff Shevlin has been promising a complete book for over 20 years and he is a good marketer/promoter so he has worked on what will benefit him. I know that sounds harsh, it isn't meant to be. he has focused on events from the west coast exhibitions.

    since you are so adamant about what needs to be added to the SC$ listing, I propose that you should contact the publishers of the 2nd Edition SC$ book, establish a clearinghouse online where collectors can submit medals for consideration, conceive some numbering lettering system which makes sense and then publish the book. simply saying "This fits" isn't a solution, calling something an "Unlisted SC$" doesn't make it a SC$.

    I will await the 3rd edition..................................


  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,354 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Attaching the label "So-Called Dollar" to small medals adds cachet to these items and thereby encourages greater interest, demand and price. However, I feel that only those items included in the HK reference, or newly discovered versions thereof, can properly be called "So-Called Dollars."

    In this situation, authors of the book both defined their scope and invented a unique term for their subject. Anyone is free to prepare a reference that expands and modifies HK's original subject, but no one can properly call a small medal a "So-Called Dollar" unless it was part of the original publication.

  • keetskeets Posts: 20,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Roger, the only thing I would dispute is that I believe Thomas Elder was the first to use the term "So-Called Dollar" around 1910 in one of his catalogues. otherwise, you have stated my sentiment: the term is typically use as "unlisted So-Called Dollar" in an attempt to draw interest, attention and money.


  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 12:34AM

    @keets said:
    and the debate continues with member Zoins wanting to include anything and everything in a listing as a SC$.

    This is not true. I've stated my position many times including above, so there's no reason to spread untruths about my position. If there is a case where I've written that "anything and everything" should be listed as a So-Called Dollar, please post it. Otherwise, please stop with this untruth.

    My position is that I think we should classify items that fit the definition of a So-Called Dollar as such, instead of requiring a listing in H&K which has been stated as a preference by keets.

    My approach is the same as token definitions where a token does not need to be cataloged in Rulau to be called a "token". I think a So-Called Dollar does not need to be in H&K to be a So-Called Dollar, it simply needs to fit the definition.

    This is also important because the H&K editors have limited resources and are not accepting new listings, unless they are extensions of existing ones. If we followed the approach outlined by keets where only H&K listed items would be called So-Called Dollars, the classification of such items would functionally be dead right now.

    consider your interpretation below:
    Under ideal circumstances, if they catalogued some items that violated guideline #4, if they had more time and resources, they would have presumably cataloged more.
    --- my presumption, based on the scope of their work, is that they did in fact "catalogue" many, many items which didn't necessarily fit into what they were trying to accomplish. seeing the sheer number of those medals they were excluded, not because they didn't have the time to track them down, but because they did locate them and they didn't meet their criteria at the time. they most likely didn't see a need to prove the negative, to prove that no unlooped medals existed

    When I look at John Raymond's catalog of Unlisted So-Called Dollars, many of them do not look at different from H&K listed pieces to me. In addition to John Raymond, both Jeff Shevlin and members of the H&K team have told me many So-Called Dollars are not listed in H&K due to the effort involved, not because pieces are not qualified. Jeff Shevlin and Bill Hyder are cataloging additional pieces now with their own SH numbering system.

    It appears that John Raymond, Jeff Shevlin, Bill Hyder, PCGS and NGC are all of the opinion that the So-Called Dollar term should be applied to pieces not listed in H&K.

    several members were involved in the 2nd Edition. they included some new listings and chose not to include the many others they were aware of that you would insist are SC$'s.

    I've communicated with people who worked on the 2nd edition and continue to work on the H&K guide. It was recognized there are additional unlisted pieces that qualify under the So-Called Dollar definition but are not included due to level of effort to include them, not because that they did not qualify.

    You can read this for yourself on the H&K site which indicates lack of cataloging can be due to lack of time and resources, not validity.

    Regrettably, the current editors do not have the time, resources, or arguably the experience to produce a comprehensive reference that includes every medal that rightfully could be called a So-Called Dollar

    https://so-calleddollars.com/New_Discoveries.html

    since you are so adamant about what needs to be added to the SC$ listing, I propose that you should contact the publishers of the 2nd Edition SC$ book, establish a clearinghouse online where collectors can submit medals for consideration, conceive some numbering lettering system which makes sense and then publish the book.

    I don't need to do this because it's not just me. It's John Raymond, Jeff Shevlin, Bill Hyder, PCGS, NGC and others. Jeff Shevlin and Bill Hyder are cataloging more So-Called Dollars without HK numbers. John Raymond has a site with Unlisted So-Called Dollars. PCGS and NGC are both cataloging unlisted SCDs and assigning new HK numbers.

    It seems to be well recognized by leaders in the So-Called Dollar community that not every medal that rightfully could be called a So-Called Dollar can be given a H&K number, as stated by the H&K publishers, and that others are taking action to improve this situation. You may not agree, but it's happening.

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 12:51AM

    @RogerB said:
    Attaching the label "So-Called Dollar" to small medals adds cachet to these items and thereby encourages greater interest, demand and price. However, I feel that only those items included in the HK reference, or newly discovered versions thereof, can properly be called "So-Called Dollars."

    I disagree with this since I view "So-Called Dollar" as a generic term like "token" or "colonial". A piece does not have to be listed in a catalog to be called a "token" or a "colonial", it only needs to fit the definition.

    Others agree with me and have started to catalog more So-Called Dollars without HK numbers, like Jeff Shevlin and Bill Hyder with their SH numbers and John Raymond / PCGS / NGC with their Unlisted SCD listings.

    The H&K publishers also agree with me by stating that "the current editors do not have the time, resources, or arguably the experience to produce a comprehensive reference that includes every medal that rightfully could be called a So-Called Dollar." What they do not say is that pieces without a HK number are not So-Called Dollars.

    In this situation, authors of the book both defined their scope and invented a unique term for their subject. Anyone is free to prepare a reference that expands and modifies HK's original subject, but no one can properly call a small medal a "So-Called Dollar" unless it was part of the original publication.

    As mentioned by keets, you are mistaken here. The authors of the book being discussed, Harold E. Hibler and Charles V. Kappen, did not invent the term. Hibler and Kappen published their book in 1963, while the term was used by Thomas Elder in 1912, over 50 years earlier. The term was also used by Richard D. Kenney in 1953, 10 years before the HK reference. Read more here:

    http://www.so-calleddollar.com/about-so-called-dollars/

  • keetskeets Posts: 20,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think a So-Called Dollar does not need to be in H&K to be a So-Called Dollar, it simply needs to fit the definition.
    hence, my reference to anything and everything.

    I disagree with this since I view "So-Called Dollar" as a generic term like token or colonial
    our differences arise because of this, I don't think of SC$ as a generic term, it is well defined with a numbered listing. you and the others mentioned who are working on a list seem to be hung up on needing to have new additions in some sort of chronological order that follows current listings. the slow progress would indicate that isn't possible without re-numbering everything, also indicated by the "SH" numbers you mentioned.

    let's re-invent the mousetrap.

    a more feasible solution is just to reach some agreement with the Copyright holders and arrange for my aforementioned "Clearinghouse" where new medals may be submitted for consideration. one thing I understand about this process is that it should follow as any other discipline, with a process and oversight. not the ability of anyone to say "Unlisted SC$" and have it included. no matter what new numbering system is arrived at there will most probably always be a medal discovered that can't be neatly fit in where it chronologically belongs.

    that seems to be the sticking point, not whether something fits the description. when that gets done I am onboard, till then I resist. new discoveries may appear to fit the criteria for inclusion but shouldn't until a number can be assigned.


  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019 10:31AM

    @keets said:
    I think a So-Called Dollar does not need to be in H&K to be a So-Called Dollar, it simply needs to fit the definition.
    hence, my reference to anything and everything.

    Which is untrue, so please stop. It makes it harder to understand your reasoning.

    I'll offer an example, which is that I've told people specifically I don't think coin club medals will ever qualify as So-Called Dollars. I also don't say that colonials, territorials or NCLT should be called So-Called Dollars.

    I'm not sure why this is so hard to grasp, unless you are purposely trying to sensationalize things.

    @keets said:
    I disagree with this since I view "So-Called Dollar" as a generic term like token or colonial
    our differences arise because of this, I don't think of SC$ as a generic term

    Even the HK editors indicate it's a generic term in the page and quote I mentioned above. You seem to view the HK editors as an authority so it seems like you should accept their view on this as well.

    I'm not sure why you are stuck on this if even the HK editors are not.

    @keets said:
    you and the others mentioned who are working on a list seem to be hung up on needing to have new additions in some sort of chronological order that follows current listings. the slow progress would indicate that isn't possible without re-numbering everything, also indicated by the "SH" numbers you mentioned.

    I think you're putting words in people's mouths again. I never said I needed new listings to follow current (HK) listings. I'm perfectly happy with SH listings and John Raymond’s listings andother approaches. I'm even happy when PCGS or NGC catalog an "Unlisted So-Called Dollar" without a number. Of course, I'm happy when things are assigned HK numbers, but it's not the only way.

    @keets said:
    let's re-invent the mousetrap.

    a more feasible solution is just to reach some agreement with the Copyright holders and arrange for my aforementioned "Clearinghouse" where new medals may be submitted for consideration.

    I don't think this will work because they've indicated (a) they don't have the time and (b) they don't have the expertise. You seem to be looking for the HK editors to be some kind of judge of what is legitimate but they've already indicated they don't have the expertise to do so.

    If you start one, I'll support it but I don't think your approach will work given what the HK editors have stated about their time and expertise.

    @keets said:
    that seems to be the sticking point, not whether something fits the description. when that gets done I am onboard, till then I resist. new discoveries may appear to fit the criteria for inclusion but shouldn't until a number can be assigned.

    You can resist, but as mentioned, multiple parties are already moving the hobby forward. I’m mostly reporting on what’s already happening. I think the ship has sailed or is at least starting sail.

  • keetskeets Posts: 20,985 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Even the HK editors indicate it's a generic term in the page and quote I mentioned above.
    perhaps you should entertain the idea that they may be wrong in referring to the term "So Called Dollar" as generic, there seems to be some very specific criteria.

    Which is untrue, so please stop. It makes it harder to understand your reasoning.
    I will make you a deal --- I will stop riding you like Zorro about "anything and everything" if you will stop using the term "Unlisted So Called Dollar" while also encouraging others to also stop. that's fair, right??


  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 9:10AM

    @keets said:
    Even the HK editors indicate it's a generic term in the page and quote I mentioned above.
    perhaps you should entertain the idea that they may be wrong in referring to the term "So Called Dollar" as generic, there seems to be some very specific criteria.

    I think the HK editors are right here. I think you are wrong. It seems like multiple parties leading the hobby in this area agree with me.

    Which is untrue, so please stop. It makes it harder to understand your reasoning.
    I will make you a deal --- I will stop riding you like Zorro about "anything and everything" if you will stop using the term "Unlisted So Called Dollar" while also encouraging others to also stop. that's fair, right??

    It is not equivalent since PCGS, John Raymond, Jeff Shevlin, Bill Hyder and others use the “Unlisted So-Called Dollar” term. If you won’t correct your statements to be correct, you can continue to be incorrect. It’s not the only area.

  • keetskeets Posts: 20,985 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 9:04AM

    have a nice day, collect what you like and enjoy, then you can call it what you want to. maybe we should avoid further discussion about this since we won't agree, not even to disagree. :)

    you may have the last word if you want it.

    --- I would make one last point, that you bring up the "HK Editors" but conveniently danced around an earlier comment by tmot99. I will assume you know who he is.


  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 10:03AM

    @keets said:
    I would make one last point, that you bring up the "HK Editors" but conveniently danced around an earlier comment by tmot99. I will assume you know who he is.

    I mentioned "HK editors" because I was referring to private conversations I've had with HK editors and it's not my place to disclose private conversations. I was also referring to the website which is a collective work.

    I know who @tmot99 is and responded to what he wrote. Did you read his post and my response?

    Tom Hoffman mentioned the criteria that "no loop be attached unless a non-looped piece also existed" to which I responded by showing a non-looped piece cataloged by John Raymond as an Unlisted So-Called Dollar. Tom did not respond after that piece was posted in the thread and his post indicates he believes medals that fit the definition should be So-Called Dollars including many from the Columbian Expo.

    I believe this is an example of where the HK editors indicate they have a lack of expertise.

    I understand that we disagree, but I also haven't seen anyone with your point of view, requiring a HK number to be called a So-Called Dollar. Even Tom uses the definition, not a catalog number, to determine what is a So-Called Dollar. Roger indicated agreement with your view but that was based on a faulty assumption that Hibler and Kappen created the So-Called Dollar term, which you corrected. Can you point to anyone that shares your view using valid reasoning?

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,354 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 10:07AM

    If aficionados of small medals don't like the HK book, and feel it is too limiting, then they should produce a more expansive alternative. However, they cannot legitimately expropriate the term "So-Called Dollar" and apply it to their new (and maybe much better) guide.

    The term "So-Called Dollar" is the authors' invention - exclusive to them and their creative work. It should remain so both to avoid pointless confusion, and out of respect for the authors' creativity.

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 10:17AM

    @RogerB said:
    If aficionados of small medals don't like the HK book, and feel it is too limiting, then they should produce a more expansive alternative. However, they cannot legitimately expropriate the term "So-Called Dollar" and apply it to their new (and maybe much better) guide.

    This is faulty reasoning because the HK book used a pre-existing term that was used by others for the prior 50+ years. The term was first used by Thomas Elder over 50 years before Hibler and Kaplan published their book. The authors and editors of the book in no way created or have exclusive rights to the term.

    Your reasoning sounds like someone saying new INCO and Gould cataloged patterns cannot be called patterns unless they have a Judd number.

    @rogerb said:
    The term "So-Called Dollar" is the authors' invention - exclusive to them and their creative work.

    This is incorrect. The term was not invented by the HK authors. It was used in the hobby by others for the prior 50+ years. Please do recognize Thomas Elder, not Hibler and Kappen, for first using the term.

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,354 ✭✭✭✭✭

    No, the reasoning is sound - HK "invented," defined and otherwise established the term for practical numismatic use and it was used in ONLY that sense until recently when other tried to appropriate it for their own gain.

    I DO NOT endorse any bastardization of the author's term, and reject any attempt by anyone or any group to appropriate "So-Called Dollar" for their modern, greedy use.

    Those who want to catalog and collect small medals or ones that approximate the size of standard silver dollars should have the guts to do their own work and come up with their own descriptive term - not steal the work of another.

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 10:38AM

    @RogerB said:
    No, the reasoning is sound - HK "invented," defined and otherwise established the term for practical numismatic use and it was used in ONLY that sense until recently when other tried to appropriate it for their own gain.

    I DO NOT endorse any bastardization of the author's term, and reject any attempt by anyone or any group to appropriate "So-Called Dollar" for their modern, greedy use.

    Those who want to catalog and collect small medals or ones that approximate the size of standard silver dollars should have the guts to do their own work and come up with their own descriptive term - not steal the work of another.

    It is not sound. The term was not only used by Thomas Elder 50 years before the HK book, it was also used by Richard D. Kenney in an article 10 years before the HK book. It is incorrect to claim people who popularize a term also invented it.

    It would be a different issue if Hibler and Kappen used the term in an entirely different way, but they are using the pre-existing term for the same purposes as it was used before.

    I hope modern authors are not co-opting / stealing pre-existing terms and claiming they are the inventors of it. This could damage their credibility. If an author wants to "invent" a term, such a person should create a new term, not steal a pre-existing one created and used by others.

  • RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,354 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is patently unethical, aside from the confusion, misinformation and falsehood generated by stealing HK's phrase.

    There are no exception and no excuses can be accepted for such blatant misuse.

    Modern collectors of small medals should write and publish their own book. They can cross-reference HK all they want, and include whatever items they wish in the new book.

    But do no steal from HK.

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 19,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019 8:17PM

    @RogerB said:
    It is patently unethical, aside from the confusion, misinformation and falsehood generated by stealing HK's phrase.

    There are no exception and no excuses can be accepted for such blatant misuse.

    Modern collectors of small medals should write and publish their own book. They can cross-reference HK all they want, and include whatever items they wish in the new book.

    But do no steal from HK.

    There is something unethical here but it is claiming the inventor of a term is the popularizer and not the creator.

    I would say Do not steal from Thomas Elder!

    I hope you are not stealing terms for your own books.

    Authors should not be able to claim pre-existing terms as their own inventions. It is unethical and just incorrect to claim someone did something that someone else did. If authors also want to be inventors, they should have the creativity to make something new, not steal the creativity of and use by others. It is unethical.

Sign In or Register to comment.