GTG 1950 Franklin Half Dollar PCGS

The part you missed is that technical standards are subjective to a much, MUCH lesser degree.

“This kid failed every test, but since he’s a nice guy and did his homework, I will give him the same grade as the guy who aced every test but never turned in any homework.”

- Said by no instructor ever.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The sad part is your attempt to be cute just showed a lack of knowledge as that has happened in classes before, unless you’re now going to argue you know the exact weighted average of assignments that every teacher in the world uses......

Plenty of teachers weigh homework as much as tests (which they don’t even have to be for that to be possible) and there’s countless ways the average could work out the same. You can even find teachers that weigh homework more than tests.

 

I went for 65+ FBL. However I really don't know what FBL should technically look like. I feel better on the grading but then again in the past 6 months my only Franklin has been a 1951 gotten at the bank.

I should buy a few one day as they are a classic design but I'm trying for a 1939-42 Walking Liberty.

 

I referenced your reply for context. I was replying to @baseball21, not to you. And BTW, what you just said, you're wrong.

Another wild pitch. Technical grading standards are objective. "Eye appeal," the market grading standard, is as arbitrary as it is capricious.

 

Any standard made by humans is subjective As a result of opinions that change over time. The earth being flat was a standard for the longest time. So was the sun rotating around the earth and countless other things. The grading standards of 70 years ago are different than 50 years prior.

But sure tell us how “technical” standards are objective laws of nature

 

I don't think you want to know. I think you're just being smart. If I'm wrong, let me know. I'll apologize, and I'll explain it to you. In lieu of that, I think I'll take a pass on this outside pitch.

 

Beisbol and coins.........love it.

 

Technical grading is only subjective for borderline cases. Like is it VF-35 or EF-40 when it could swing either way no matter how many experts look at it. Otherwise, it is a matter of “does the coin meet the criteria for this grade level? Yes or no?”

 

For me, homework has always counted 20% of my grade, and tests have always been at least 50%. Your attempt to be coy was just an excuse to evade the question, like you often do.

You want to know the sad part? I expected you to say that very thing. Find the loophole to get out. Yes, I know someone who (supposedly) took a class with a 50% homework and 50% test grade. I also never said that the one guy aced his homework assignments.

But the point which you completely missed/avoided was that two people should not receive the same grade when one only has superficial qualities for the class (nice, responsible, but little intelligence) and the other has the necessary qualities for the class (intelligence).

Should IQ tests be weighted based on how amicable a person is? Should restaurant inspection scores be weighted on how nice the staff is and how tasty the food is? Should car safety ratings be weighted on how comfortable the car is?

 

I’d certainly love to hear an explanation on how a human critieriia based off of subjective crititeria that have changed over time long before anyone here was born is somehow objective?

 

You are very wrong in your definition of an “objective standard”.

An ojective standard is one which has been clearly defined and is looked to to compare against. If it needs to be changed, such as with the kilogram, it is simply redefined and clearly published so that people know what the standard is and continue comparing against the new standard. When you compare against the standard, it either matches or it doesn’t, or is composed of a definite number of standard units. In other words, comparing with it is completely objective.

A subjective standard, on the other hand, has no clear definition that can be compared to. Is there a clear definition for labeling something as “pretty”? Or how about “big”? These standards lie within each individual person, and they can change them without defining how the standard would be compared to. These are opinions, and they are the definition of subjective.

Look me in the eye and tell me that I can hold up a random object and say “the mass of this object is one kilogram” and be correct 100% of the time. If you say that I am correct all of the time, then the kilogram is a subjective standard. If you say that I am only correct when the object matches the established definition of a kilogram, then it is an objective standard.

 

No I pointed out that you were wrong with your assertation. Being wrong isn’t a loophole it’s being wrong.

Not testing well isn’t a surefire sign of being dumb neither is not turning in homework. Getting a certain grade isn’t an iq measurement either. There are sooo many variables in your attempt that you’re just saying things no with no correlation.

Even in your example doing all your homework compared to some one that never does it isn’t superficial. Your experience and attempts at getting an undergraduate degree are illrelevant statitisticslly to the claims of “said no instructor ever” you made.

It’s a much better life quality to admit the mistake than keep doubling down on false information especially when it was that person who attempted to add an irrelevant factor such as personality whoch was still an invalid inaccurate comparison.

To make matters worse your response even seemed to indicate that you even knew someone that invalidated your homework test claim by how his teacher weighed things saying he had a 50/50 break down and you decided to make the false claims that someone’s couldn’t get the same result from homework and test grades anyway.

 

Wear, hit mark numbers/location/severativy, surface preservation. All subjective assessments of something.

Why do EAC top experts grade things differently, why do different ancient experts grade things differently?

Grading involves levels of subjectivity. The “technical” standards themselves are subjective standards some humans made and experts interpret differently along with applying their own experience. Some people get upset because it hurts their ability to flip things/make money. Others egos get in the way.

It’s objective that everyone will die. It’s subjective that having x marks will hold a coin to a 63

 

I does not change the fact that you are wrong in how you define an objective standard.

Oh what did you say earlier?

I’m done.

 

To be an actual objective standard that cannot change it has to be based on actual objective information that is set in stone such as everyone dies. Hunam rating scales are subjective. Thanks for playing

 

The concept of Earth being flat is not a "standard" it was a theory that went out of favor largely by the 6th century BCE...

 

Just like old grading was a theory that evolved over time. They were “standards” of their time and people that stopped learning were left behind

 

You are getting caught up in semantics of the word standard. Use a different analogy than the flat earth thing.

Do you know the difference between precision vs. Accuracy?
Precision is how close a measurement is to the actual value of something. Accuracy is how repeatable the measurement is. You can be very accurate but not very precise. So if you have a standard that is based on measurements solely you can be precise (close to the correct value) and accurate (repeatable). But if the standards are not based on just repeatable measurements and include judgement calls then at times you will be neither precise or accurate applying the standards.

 

Both are actually subjective human contrusts and reasonable objectivity levels vary by topic. I don’t care that many here will flame me for pointing these things out or not understand intelligent discussion or want things to be how they were decades ago so they don’t have to learn.

Shooting is an easy example to understand. The selected target is completely subjective. Nature didn’t tell you to pick the red dot in the middle, neither did physics, neither did life or death you’re shooting at paper. That’s a subjective target. Grading a coin is not dictated by anything other than human opinion, some opinions are worth much more than others.

Accurately missing the target in the same spot is a subjective form of saying it was accurate. You missed the target that’s not accurate to many people no matter how close the grouping.

Now a bunch of the blah blah will jump on and just say that I just condemned grading but I did not. Higher intelligence would realize that the precision target was a subjective target in the first place and something cannot be 100 percent objective when subjectivity is involved as personal feelings are a disqualifier for being objective which again is a sucjective human construct definition.

Objectivity literally has definitions of lack of personal feelings/bias and open mindedness and dealing with facts without personal interpretations. What some people are stating is anything but bias free or open minded as they want things their way which is anything but objective. Trying to say this that and the next is wrong because it isn’t how they want it is not objective.

The sooner people learn that human rating systems are subjective and subject to personal opinions where real experts opinions carry more weight the better off they will be. This idea that there’s some natural law of grading or that because it was done this way decades ago it’s better when that was a change from decades prior is not objective and unfortunately new people may fall for it and be mislead.

Grading is and always has been an evolving construct where increased knowledge will tweek it and collectors and the market themselves will have an influence. Everyone should make the effort to continue to learn to be relevant. Barry Bonds was the best hitter on the planet for a decade, he wouldn’t even be relevant in baseball now. Many geniuses and theories have been disproven with more time and many of today’s theories will eventually be disproven in the future.

The idea of this is how I did it so it should always be done this way is a fatal flaw of mankind. If people want to be on an island by themselves with theories that is their right, but it doesn’t mean everyone else is wrong.