Beautiful. As struck with full original luster? Not.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@jmlanzaf said:
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
It’s almost scary when 99% of us agree on a topic.
Blue pill, and I'm not talking about Viagra.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
Well, what that member doesn't understand is that ALL language has different meanings in different contexts. It is downright silly to think that you can take YOUR arbitrary definition and apply it within a field that has its own specific context.
"Dressing" a sandwich is different than "dressing" a salad, for example.
Laundering clothing is very different than laundering money.
Kicking a habit is different than kicking a soccer ball.
Framing a painting is different than framing a person.
"Step down" means something very different in electronics than in architecture.
Balance means something very different in chemistry than neurology.
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
You might want to volunteer for this study. They might need an outlier.
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
Well, what that member doesn't understand is that ALL language has different meanings in different contexts. It is downright silly to think that you can take YOUR arbitrary definition and apply it within a field that has its own specific context.
"Dressing" a sandwich is different than "dressing" a salad, for example.
Laundering clothing is very different than laundering money.
Kicking a habit is different than kicking a soccer ball.
Framing a painting is different than framing a person.
"Step down" means something very different in electronics than in architecture.
Balance means something very different in chemistry than neurology.
Shall I go on?
The irrational nature of this post helps me understand how easily some people are duped. All of the examples you gave are referencing objects that have very different natures. I am applying the words fully original to coins (made out of metal) as they would be applied to all other metals where the surface of the metal has been altered as a result to exposure to the environment. We are not talking about metals and wood or metals and plastics but how the words would be applied to other metals when oxidation, rust, toning, etc. occur. If oxidation on an iron fence occurred we wouldn't refer to the fence as being full original. If oxidation occurred on the airframe of an aircraft we would claim it's fully original.
I have a bridge in Brooklyn built in the 1869 I'd like to sell you. No worries, it's fully original.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
Well, what that member doesn't understand is that ALL language has different meanings in different contexts. It is downright silly to think that you can take YOUR arbitrary definition and apply it within a field that has its own specific context.
"Dressing" a sandwich is different than "dressing" a salad, for example.
Laundering clothing is very different than laundering money.
Kicking a habit is different than kicking a soccer ball.
Framing a painting is different than framing a person.
"Step down" means something very different in electronics than in architecture.
Balance means something very different in chemistry than neurology.
Shall I go on?
The irrational nature of this post helps me understand how easily some people are duped. All of the examples you gave are referencing objects that have very different natures. I am applying the words fully original to coins (made out of metal) as they would be applied to all other metals where the surface of the metal has been altered as a result to exposure to the environment. We are not talking about metals and wood or metals and plastics but how the words would be applied to other metals when oxidation, rust, toning, etc. occur. If oxidation on an iron fence occurred we wouldn't refer to the fence as being full original. If oxidation occurred on the airframe of an aircraft we would claim it's fully original.
I have a bridge in Brooklyn built in the 1869 I'd like to sell you. No worries, it's fully original.
There's nothing irrational about that post. It is quite a sane list.
You have created your OWN definition of "original" as applied to coins. EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE, including the ANA, considers "original" to mean not manipulated by human beings. NO ONE, except you, considers original to mean unchanged by natural processes from the moment of conception.
Since you acknowledge (implicitly) the ability of words in different fields to be defined by that field, you might consider accepting the definition of "original" as defined by the field of numismatics.
Nah...never mind. That was a silly thought. LOL.
I'm out. I don't even know how I got sucked back in.
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
When you live in an echo chamber it’s easy to have that perception.
This forum never agrees on ANYTHING, except the grading guidelines. That should tell you something.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
Well, what that member doesn't understand is that ALL language has different meanings in different contexts. It is downright silly to think that you can take YOUR arbitrary definition and apply it within a field that has its own specific context.
"Dressing" a sandwich is different than "dressing" a salad, for example.
Laundering clothing is very different than laundering money.
Kicking a habit is different than kicking a soccer ball.
Framing a painting is different than framing a person.
"Step down" means something very different in electronics than in architecture.
Balance means something very different in chemistry than neurology.
Shall I go on?
The irrational nature of this post helps me understand how easily some people are duped. All of the examples you gave are referencing objects that have very different natures. I am applying the words fully original to coins (made out of metal) as they would be applied to all other metals where the surface of the metal has been altered as a result to exposure to the environment. We are not talking about metals and wood or metals and plastics but how the words would be applied to other metals when oxidation, rust, toning, etc. occur. If oxidation on an iron fence occurred we wouldn't refer to the fence as being full original. If oxidation occurred on the airframe of an aircraft we would claim it's fully original.
I have a bridge in Brooklyn built in the 1869 I'd like to sell you. No worries, it's fully original.
There's nothing irrational about that post. It is quite a sane list.
You have created your OWN definition of "original" as applied to coins. EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE, including the ANA, considers "original" to mean not manipulated by human beings. NO ONE, except you, considers original to mean unchanged by natural processes from the moment of conception.
Since you acknowledge (implicitly) the ability of words in different fields to be defined by that field, you might consider accepting the definition of "original" as defined by the field of numismatics.
Nah...never mind. That was a silly thought. LOL.
I'm out. I don't even know how I got sucked back in.
No I haven't...
Fully: completely or entirely; to the furthest extent
Original: present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.
Luster: the appearance of a mineral surface in terms of its light-reflective qualities.
The numismatic community has twisted the meaning to the point that this...
Can be considered fully original luster as well as this...
Blue pill.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
One in the galaxy, how about the universe?
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
BTW, my previous post was based on memory, the toned coin on the ANA website is actually MS67 and the text states "Fully lustrous". Sorry for the mixup.
The point still stands: The ANA clearly does not take the position that toning precludes a superb gem uncirculated grade.
Only ONE person in the galaxy takes that position.
One in the galaxy, how about the universe?
How about the multiverse?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
There are an infinite number of you In the multiverse.
And half of them believe toned coins have fully original luster. However, many of the universes with you believing that have since imploded, so your are helping to stabilize this one (or at least giving some of us something to post about).
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Comments
.
.
"But it is toned so it can't be fully original luster so not a 68 because ANA Grading Standards say..."
[ Then repeat last 10 pages here. ]
.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Beautiful. As struck with full original luster? Not.
Which grading guidelines? Would those be the ones that say a 68 coin is as struck with fully original luster?
Blue pill, and I'm not talking about Viagra.
Yup. There is one member of the forum who doesn't quite understand them. You may know him.
I understand it perfectly but it seems much of the community doesn’t mind the haphazard use of the English language. For them “as struck” and “fully original” can mean anything the lords of numismatics says it means. A silver coin can be yellow, purple, green, red or brown and they’ll say “yes sir, fully original”.
Well, what that member doesn't understand is that ALL language has different meanings in different contexts. It is downright silly to think that you can take YOUR arbitrary definition and apply it within a field that has its own specific context.
"Dressing" a sandwich is different than "dressing" a salad, for example.
Laundering clothing is very different than laundering money.
Kicking a habit is different than kicking a soccer ball.
Framing a painting is different than framing a person.
"Step down" means something very different in electronics than in architecture.
Balance means something very different in chemistry than neurology.
Shall I go on?
This thread is in reruns already??
https://www.speak.ae/blog/6-english-words-with-multiple-meanings
You might want to volunteer for this study. They might need an outlier.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2577612/
When @jmlanzaf finds a sparring partner that's as bullheaded as he is, the "show" can theoretically run forever...
I guess this counts as "pollution", using your own definition.
You and I are so much alike we might be related.
Well, I'm not really into guns, so does anyone here have any suggestions on the next best way to kill myself?
You can't really pollute a cesspool.
Well, actually, you may be able to.....
The irrational nature of this post helps me understand how easily some people are duped. All of the examples you gave are referencing objects that have very different natures. I am applying the words fully original to coins (made out of metal) as they would be applied to all other metals where the surface of the metal has been altered as a result to exposure to the environment. We are not talking about metals and wood or metals and plastics but how the words would be applied to other metals when oxidation, rust, toning, etc. occur. If oxidation on an iron fence occurred we wouldn't refer to the fence as being full original. If oxidation occurred on the airframe of an aircraft we would claim it's fully original.
I have a bridge in Brooklyn built in the 1869 I'd like to sell you. No worries, it's fully original.
There's nothing irrational about that post. It is quite a sane list.
You have created your OWN definition of "original" as applied to coins. EVERYONE ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE, including the ANA, considers "original" to mean not manipulated by human beings. NO ONE, except you, considers original to mean unchanged by natural processes from the moment of conception.
Since you acknowledge (implicitly) the ability of words in different fields to be defined by that field, you might consider accepting the definition of "original" as defined by the field of numismatics.
Nah...never mind. That was a silly thought. LOL.
I'm out. I don't even know how I got sucked back in.
Resorting to petty insults?
That's okay, if it works for you. I'm happy to help you boost your self esteem.
No I haven't...
Fully: completely or entirely; to the furthest extent
Original: present or existing from the beginning; first or earliest.
Luster: the appearance of a mineral surface in terms of its light-reflective qualities.
The numismatic community has twisted the meaning to the point that this...
Can be considered fully original luster as well as this...
Blue pill.
Nah, just an inside joke.
One in the galaxy, how about the universe?
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
How about the multiverse?
There are an infinite number of you In the multiverse.
And half of them believe toned coins have fully original luster. However, many of the universes with you believing that have since imploded, so your are helping to stabilize this one (or at least giving some of us something to post about).
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin