what happened to thread of the week?

I thought this was a excellent idea!!! Where did it go? I started a perfectly good fight just to get nominated, now I WANT MY PRIZE!!!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

mods give him his due- ban him

 

Like all "excellent" ideas, it will have it's flaws.

 

Mike - gave you a vote not because you started a fight but because I agree that many people have differing opinions of something that has some meat to it. It seems to be a complex issue that everyone can learn a little something from. I appreciate everyone that added something specific to the topic - especially Doug for putting up with my comments and questions! - Thanks for the thread regardless of who wins! ~ Darryl

 

lol, thanks Darryl. I was only teasin... well, kinda... anyway

I learned alot in the thread and am still spun about a few things, but I hope that the meat of that discussion continues because it's fascinating stuff and the education gained in that thread can really pay off for people down the road. Honestly, I am a bit more confused now than when I started, but I am certain that it will benefit me to know more in this particular area, hence the imputus for the thread.

Doug - I am especially grateful for your continued attempts to clarify this topic. I notice that you ask people for their definitions of terms in order to get where they are coming from. What I hope is that you will continue to state what your definitions are so that we can be more clear as to what you are saying.

Ben - I love the fact that you have strong opinions and are not afraid to defend or discuss them. Don't ever give up in trying to educate those who need it.

... and I swear I knew the discussion was going to be controversial, we've been down this road before but I was hoping to keep the discussion on track and not let it devolve into a fight. I was only kidding about starting a fight in my comment.

 

The definition??? That's just a bit assuming, Doug.

Ben has also quoted the pros only to be told he is wrong. I was under the assumption that we all have knowledge to contribute and it is only through the free exchange of ideas and individual interpretations of the data that we can come to a consensus. I don't think that especially in the arena of grading that there are ANY absolute rights and wrongs.

also, I personally found the "pal" comment to be condescending when I was being sincere with my thanks to all who have participated.

 

isn't knowledge allowed to evolve over time? I know that scientific knowledge has, why not coin knowledge? Can't the experts opinions change and evolve over time as they gather more knowledge and more data without their memories being faulty? I think they no longer agree with what they wrote all of those years ago, as they have refined their theories over time.

 

Its happening on the sly and was called gradeflation till CAC caught them in the act

 

Doug, you have to look no further than fundamental science to observe my point. Aristotle had definite ideas of motion and how the universe behaved, Galileo had a keener understanding and improved how we think of bodies in motion. Newton then evolved this thought a bit further until Einstein gave us the theory we use today.

My parallel is this: Our grading system is not perfect, nor were Newton's laws of motion in predicting the movement of our universe. Einstein improved on them more, but yet his theory still doesn't account for some bodies' motion. In other words, even Einstein's theory is not 100% accurate and will have to be improved upon but in the interim, it is the best we have to work with and so we use it.

A brockage error is still a brockage error, and I am NOT calling it an off-center strike. Those issues are either black-and-white or a matter of terminology. Grading clearly is not. I am advocating that we continue to refine the standards that we use to grade coins so that we can all grade them more accurately and more importantly, we can all somewhat agree on the grade. This happens though the EXCHANGE of ideas, not the proclamation of what is right and what is wrong. That is what I have been trying to get at.

 

If we merely accepted the establishment never to improve upon it, we would still be under Caesar's rule.

and spock just for clarification: gradeflation and the refinement of ideas in grading are NOT the same. One assumes that what was A is now B, the other is improving on current ideas through the injection of further data, knowledge, and thought.

 

after Caesars rule ended the dark ages began hardly an improvement but i see what you mean

 

Almost sounds like Market Grading---always changing

and yes...I'm just putting wood on the fire

Speedy

 

That's an opinion that I completely disagree with. The constitution changes all the time and it's still called the constitution. It was also established by the very pillars of our society. Everything should have the ability to change as information changes. I do it everyday in manufacturing with process improvement and manufacturing has been around in some form for as long as people have organized themselves to make things. I do not have a copy of the ANA standards 1st edition to present. I will get a copy of the current standards very soon. If that organization has not adapted itself and it’s definitions since it’s beginning then I am glad I am not a member.

Please don’t assume that based on these or any other comments that I think I understand the intricacies of the hobby well enough to say specific changes should happen. I am saying that any system\definition should have the ability to adapt without shaking the pillars of the earth. Just because something was taught doesn’t mean it is (or was) the best way of doing something. When I am taught something – I always assume that there is a better way and someone just has not come up with it yet.

I’m sorry but this analogy is not in my opinion similar to what I/(& maybe Mike) are trying to say. I think you might compare it to a young man versus an older version of the man. The man may have been very smart to begin with but hopefully he has learned and adapted his thinking over time. He is still the same man – just smarter.

 

Actually, when the original 70 point grading standards were developed, not everyone agreed to ALL the aspects. When the final draft was submitted for review, several of those who had contributed objected to certain parts. The final product was a compromise by all concerned.

For someone to state what appears to be a differing opinion today may well have been their opinion all along. Further, since the ANA has abandoned their original standards, it's no surprise to see some of the original contributors taking a different view.