Been looking at 1883 three cent nickels on Ebay which happens to be a very difficult date for the series. I have spotted two now that appear to my eyes to be altered 1888's.... My question is this... Is it bad form to take a persons Ebay photo and show it here on CT to get confirmation of my observations before I contact the seller and tell them they have a doctored coin?
I think it's ok since we are debating authenticity (of the date). It's often bad form to comment on ongoing auctions negatively (something like saying a coin is over graded or cleaned when it is in a straight graded holder) but I don't see this as the same. Plus you can omit the seller's info and just post the photo. If all checks out, then that would be a plus for the seller. If it does not, then it will be a good warning for all here.
I'm sure people have a range of opinions on this type of thing. But, I've seen this done multiple times before in the forums (showing pictures of active Ebay listings), and I've never noticed anybody pushing back against it. I'd say go for it.
1883 and 1888 have very different date logotypes. 1883 has small and very widely spaced digits, while 1888 has much larger and closer digits. An altered 1888 wouldn't fool anyone familiar with the date logotypes.
@Randy Abercrombie If you don't feel comfortable posting the pic, just post a link to it then nobody can complain!
I don't see anything illegal, immoral or fattening about posting images and truthful comments of any kind about coins that are being offered for public auction. Absolutely nothing wrong with your posting. I am sure there are auction operators and sellers who would strongly resent anyone speaking negatively about any aspect of their wares but this is just self-serving hogwash and should be ignored. After all, they flog the positive aspects themselves all the time.
