Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;eddiespin, post: 490849, member: 4920&quot;]Gee, Doug, is there anybody you <i>don&#039;t</i> know? <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> </p><p><br /></p><p>Let me just get to the heart of the objections, strike and color, as technical grading factors. That 5% margin of error I left for myself had largely to do with what this author held on color. In my view, color should be irrelevant. It should not hold the technical grade of a coin down, nor should it raise the technical grade. That was largely my objection to this &quot;collector&#039;s&quot; way of understanding technical grading. At least, that is to say, before I read your reply, as well as that fascinating thread Lehigh just started on strike. Now, I&#039;m questioning strike, as well, as a technical grading factor. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie5" alt=":confused:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Quite honestly, I&#039;ll concede, that Lehigh thread is a little over my head. I don&#039;t know what I think about strike, now. As you&#039;re probably aware, I conceive of technical grading as &quot;condition grading.&quot; Suffice it to say (thanks, again, to Lehigh <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />D)), I&#039;m back to forming an opinion on that.</p><p><br /></p><p>PS: Very appreciative of your taking the bother to reference some of the holes in that article, BTW, Doug; thanks![/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