Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;eddiespin, post: 689837, member: 4920&quot;]Mike, if you were wondering at that, I&#039;m glad you took the time to ask. Now we can raise this to the second shelf, where it belongs. And, hopefully, it will stay there, throughout. Let me show you how we do that.</p><p><br /></p><p>Mike, your <i>personal tastes</i> in a toned coin are your business. The <i>standards, a.k.a., definitions</i>, are everybody&#039;s business, because they affect the way toning is going to be judged (a.k.a., determined) in the marketplace. And, I&#039;m saying, you can&#039;t hang that standard on &quot;intent,&quot; because that&#039;s arbitrary, subject to personal whim. Look at the toning, and forget about intent. Just like, when you grade, look at the coin, and forget about where the guy says he may have got it from. Imagine if we tried to figure out whether a coin came from circulation or not, in order to assign a grade to it. Wouldn&#039;t that be silly? It&#039;s just as silly, IMHO, to try to figure out whether the coin was intentionally toned or not, in order to judge the toning. Just look at the coin, and go by what you can see on the coin. Make sure it&#039;s not spray paint, and make sure you know what your talking about, before you go off pointing fingers. That&#039;s what I&#039;m saying. If I&#039;m being confrontational, at all, that&#039;s where it is, it&#039;s not on your <i>personal tastes</i> in a toned coin, no way.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in