Found this on kickstarter.com. this guy is making a documentary on $2 bills. The kickstarter ends today or tomorrow. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1604135107/the-two-dollar-bill-documentary Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Thanks Johnny! This is my film, everyone. It is a comprehensive look at the $2 bill. I was given permission to film the new 2013 $2s being made at the Bureau of Engraving & Printing a few weeks ago in Fort Worth. Sorry, I had to remove the rest of your post due to forum ban on self promotion.
I don't know who removed the rest of $2 bill filmmaker's post but removing the rest of the post was a highly uncalled for thing to do and is frankly, not appreciated. $2 bill filmmaker's project is legitimate and as far as I can tell, a nonprofit endeavor. The production of the $2 bill documentary is even being promoted on the currency tracking Website called www.wheresgeorge.com. You can read more about $2 bill filmmaker's project on here and here.
Thanks NOS. Being new to the forum, I was not aware of the self-promotion thing. But the link is above on johnny2dollar's post. The campaign ends tonight (Saturday the 9th) at 11:30pm eastern. I'll cut it short there so no one deletes me again! This IS a legitimate project and I know everyone will love the film. Thank you.
I removed it. It was called for, perhaps a person should read the rules and policies of any forum before posting on it. As to your appreciation ... If a person wants to self-promote, contact Peter for advertising rates.
desertgem - I joined quickly when I learned about it, knowing that people here may be very interested in a film about a popular topic that they care about. I fell into the trap of just agreeing to the policies without reading them. I apologize. The self-promotion was not with malicious intent, unlike your response. You could handle that more politely. But thank you for clarifying. It won't happen again.
Welcome to the forum $2 bill filmmaker. This looks like an interesting project, I will have to take a closer look at it. As for the rules, you're new...so no big deal. We just try and give friendly reminders to our new members who don't quite understand our policies. I have no doubt that you had no malicious intent. I don't think that desertgem's comments were directed at you. Once again, welcome to CT.
Your posts are condescending and uncalled for. This film is intended to help the collecting community and introduce new people into a growing hobby. He is not trying to promote a commercial business, but rather help numismatics through this project. Telling him to pay for advertising makes you and cointalk.com appear money hungry, looking to make a buck on this guys non-profit venture. Although I don't know what his post originally said, I have acted as a moderator on other forums. Where I came from, rules were open to interpretation because many things fall into a gray area. Just like our Judicial Branch interprets U.S. law; it is not always taken literally. I don't think there was any need for you to flex your moderator muscles here. It is not appreciated.
Why don't you read the whole thread. I did remove it nicely and said I was sorry to do it, Then NOS wrote the post I was referring to in the quote you give above. He asked who removed it and I told him, he said it was uncalled for , and I answered it was. He said he didn't appreciate me doing it... I am sorry , he has no position as to rules being enforced or not. This was not a gray area. I didn't flex any muscle I started nice and that was the end of it. Post #5 was directed to NOS as you can tell from my quote. Where in post #2 do you find it so extreme?
Not post #2. I realize your post #5 was directed at NOS, but it was about the film-maker. This was condescending. I'm guessing your "person" is the film-maker who self-promoted and should: 1. Read the rules and policies of any forum before posting on it 2. Pay cointalk.com for advertising space Your tone, "perhaps a person should read the rules..." is condescending, even though it wasn't directly aimed at the film-maker.
Well I guess there goes my 'like' score. To set the record straight , post #1 was not self promotion so it stood. The 2nd post was by the person requesting funds, so that was self promotion. Rules --> http://www.cointalk.com/link-forums/the-rules.48/
The flexing of your moderator muscles and your condescending tone occurred in two separate posts. Maybe that's where it got confusing. But how many people read the rules... honestly? Most people don't. I can admit I didn't. You don't have to automatically edit someone's post. Rules and laws are open to interpretation because of a lot of gray area. Although I don't know the content of the #2 post before the edit, I don't think it was appropriate in this situation. I understand how self-promotion conflicts with the interest of gaining advertising revenue, and where the ban on self-promotion comes from. In this case, I would let it stand considering the way this film contributes to the numismatic community, and the fact that it is non-profit.
Look, I don't understand what the problem is. A rule was broken and the post was edited as a result. Then, a different member felt obligated to complain about it and that was met with a little harsher response. Here is the thing, the staff at CT (mods and admins) are the people who enforce the rules. It is not open for debate or discussion...that's just the way it is. This is a private forum and the rules are set...there is no gray area of interpretation. When someone breaks a rule...it is our job to correct it. I'm sort of at a loss as to why that is so hard to understand?
The post shouldn't have been edited in my opinion. Your forum, your rules. I guess that's not my business. My understanding is that the ban's purpose is to avoid a conflict of interest, where individuals self-promote through free forum posts instead of paying for advertising. I don't think it's appropriate in this case to edit it out, because the film-maker is looking to help the numismatic community and is not looking to make a buck. As a result, the only way he can promote his project is by paying cointalk.com for advertising. I don't think that's fair. This is the gray area I'm referring to, where Mods could bend the rules. My beef with the Mod, is that the post directed at NOS was clearly about the film-maker. I understood it to mean that the person (film-maker) should "perhaps read the rules" and "pay for advertising." It seemed condescending and inappropriate, even though it wasn't a direct response to the film-makers post. I'm done bickering about this. It's futile at this point.
You are entitled to your opinion, that's fine. That said, it has no bearing on how the rules are enforced.
Back to the topic at hand. To the film maker, I'm sure this community has a lot of cool $2s to share, like 1917 large size legal tender stars and 1899 silver certificate stars. Also 1890 ornamental back treasury notes and 1896 educational notes have amazing art work. If you're interested I can send you some scans of the ones I have. I had a large size $2 with a paper jam error and cutting error, but I sold it recently. I don't have any small size $2 errors, but they are out there, including mismatched serial numbers and inverted overprints. Unfortunately my financial situation is quite dire at the moment, so I can't afford to donate, but I would be happy to provide you with high res images of my collection to use in your film.
