Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="moneycostingmemoney, post: 2786277, member: 86367"][USER=24314]@Insider[/USER] thank you for your response. A lot of what you said makes logical sense and I agree with almost all of it, my agreeing being I find it logical and ethical. Maybe the problem is that there is too much accepted grey area surrounding the term cleaning. Or maybe the grey area is intended to serve as a deceitful label. I do thank you for validating my definition I gave because it should end at removing foreign matter. I'm just having a hard time drinking the "wider definition" cool ade, one that has a generic sugar flavor while I'm being told it's grape. I do want to learn and understand how surfaces are altered because it would give me a better grasp on the concept and methods. I feel that would give me a more thorough list of what to look for and recognize actual alterations. The same with artificial toning. I think it as much of a fraudulent practice as altering the actual surface as it's deceiving someone and making them perceive it is something that it is not, and I'm not buying an artificially toned coin. I'm assuming by how you are responding that you have these secrets and an understanding of what these methods do to achieve their outcome. Would you be at liberty to say that "cleaning" by those methods removes any of the original surface of the coin or it strictly removes foreign materials and possibly leaves a residue behind?[/QUOTE]