I agree. The problem is largely that cheerleading is protected and those with rational dissents are expected to remain silent if this apparent new policy change takes effect. Look at the last thread Morgandude11(?) created. There was no mention by his supporters of the law and legality, and I was quite careful not to interject the law or call Carr pieces outright counterfeits in those threads. Look at the contemporary counterfeit thread. Did I in any way criticize those posters or trash their possessions? No. If someone starts a thread on Omega counterfeits or Henning nickels, am I going to object as long as information is presented factually/accurately and free from bias? No. The key is that things should be stated accurately. If they are, there is no reason to interject. Bad information, however, is like a cancer that will only metastasize and harm those in the hobby who blindly rely on everything some random anonymous poster told them on Cointalk (and judging by some of the posts here that seems to be the case). It is even more dangerous when those making misrepresentations have a pecuniary interest in the said misstatements. If voicing dissent to make sure that the uninformed know the nature of their purchases and to curb fraud makes me unpopular, then so be it. I also think this site is opening a can of worms and creating potential problems in allowing Carr's works to be openly promoted and even sold/purchased here, but this website can do whatever it wants.
Are these all the DMPL version? It's one thing to say I don't really care for a certain coin. It's another to say that I believe it's counterfeit. It's yet a third to accuse a member of violating the law by producing, buying, or selling it. The first two are well within the bounds of decorum, but the third is way, way outside, and should not be allowed, IMO. On another forum I frequent, there are some contentious topics that come up from time to time. Posters are allowed to put a [+] or [-] tag on the title to indicate that this is a pro or anti thread, only. Moderators enforce this, and it does quite well in containing the acrimony. Some variation of this could work here as well. I agree, and that's why I'm sad that the first shot was fired by someone I respect on here. Maybe we can restrict any and all discussion of the legal aspects of the pieces to partisanlines.com? That would totally work for me.
No he is not changing the rules, the warning is officially null and void. Now then, I want to make something absolutely clear here. Every member of this forum has the right to post in any thread they wish to. And it doesn't matter if they are pro or con, they CAN make the post ! There will be NONE of this - you can't say that in this thread ! Not now, and not ever ! That said, the rules of the forum stand. And they will be interpreted and enforced as they have always been interpreted and enforced.
I think the mods are just tired of having to warn people and suspend people on both sides. But there's a way to make your point and not get warnings etc.
I think these are pretty and I'd be happy to receive one as a gift, but I don't like the concept and I would never feel comfortable spending my money to support this venture. Destroying coins for any purpose bothers me to a degree. Having said that, the coin is beautiful.
Well, legal discussions can be useful and enlightening, and are totally different from politics. While I don't often understand the citations and law used in this discussion, I do find them interesting.
Mr. Carr coins are what they are " Fakes " and starting to [*] the real error world . I've been to a lot of coin shows and the feedback I've heard on his coins is " garbage " coins ......... But, on a good note, well, there's no good notes ..... [ * Language - you misspelled "annoy" ... ]
If we keep our dislike directed at the coin and not the member that posted something, we will all stay out of trouble. We should all report those that have to start name calling and being insulting. These folks are the problem. They are the ones that need to block what they don't wish to here or just move on, without a reply. We will never all agree on some topics and I see that as a good thing. Other's opinions make us think and learn. They may even make us change our own opinions.
The what? On one hand I also think it would be nice if, regardless of the legal situation, the creators of such pieces added a personal mark. Daniel Carr used to do that with his parody quarters - in those cases the initials were quite large and prominent. A smaller DC or MM on pieces like the Morgan overstrikes would (IANAL) be fine with me. On the other hand, those who claim the products such as the ones shown in the initial post are counterfeits never "act" but always "react". Fine, they are entitled to do that. But the consequence is that each and every topic where some member posts one of these overstrikes is almost immediately turned into a heated, fruitless or boring debate. Hope this won't keep anybody from posting. Christian
Maybe, the first 17 or 18 times, but it's obvious that it never goes anywhere, just like political "debates." It's certainly more political than posts that simply state undisputable, verifiable facts about political candidates, and those get warnings around here. That's why I think such discussion should be banished to the other site.
The only thing the two subjects have in common is that they are hotly debated subjects. This is a coin forum, not a political forum. And by their very nature hotly debated numismatic subjects are EXACTLY the kind of thing that should be discussed here - both sides ! But it must be done in compliance with the forum rules. And as long as it is, it shall forever not only be permitted, but encouraged. For that is the nature, the very purpose, of open discussion.
Do forum rules straight up allow members to call another member a counterfeiter? Because that happens, and nobody does anything about it.
In this context, yes they do allow it. I know what some may try and twist that around to mean but that is not the case. If one believes the coins are counterfeits, then by definition the person making those coins is a counterfeiter. So trying to make a rule that a member may not say that - well it flies in the face of all reason and common sense. And that is why it is allowed.
Rick that is kind of like inciting to riot. So I would remind you, and all others, that it is when you make things personal that you run afoul of the forum rules. And those rules will be enforced.
