The practice of recycling variety ID numbers by CONECA and others that maintain variety master lists? Been away from the hobby for a couple of years, so things could have changed. I propose that if a listing is determined to be a duplicate or not a variety at all, it be qualified with a footnote and its ID number not re-issued to a different new variety discovered later on down the line.
Confusing? it's a nightmare! \ Confusing? it's a nightmare! we have at least 5, different major attributors numbers now - CopperCoins, Wexler, Potter, Crawford, CONECA. Plus there are at least another 5 sub. attributors now. Myself I tend to drift back to the first one I learned if it's 1972 die 8 I just say 1972-P DDO-008 - if you don't know then what I mean well, you just don't know that coin. The person, whomever he/she may be that could one day marry all these numbers into one central reference that made quick concise sense will be a God in my book. I've mentioned this to Potter, Crawford and John Bordner and they say right off the bat - it will not happen but theres always hope. Now if you are determined enough you can with some amount of study cross all the numbers yourself for each coin (as you go) that you wish and come up with the numbers. It's not impossible, but it is more complicated than need be, I think?
Maybe this will help - well it's a start Still not as confusing - when a variety is removed from the files and that number is issued to a newly discovered variety.
