Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;imrich, post: 3104676, member: 22331&quot;]Kurt, I believe to the contrary of your opinion/statement.</p><p><br /></p><p>You Stated: &quot;Everybody has admitted that since Day One.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>You are arguing what both Doug and I have stated, by quoting from a document written 36 years after my reference: &quot;The official ANA grading standards do not seek to <i>influence </i>or <i>establish </i><span style="color: #ff0000"><b><u>current</u></b></span> grading practices&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Yes, I agree with you that it appears standards have evolved from technical to imaginary?</p><p><br /></p><p>With your legal understandings I believe you know our beliefs are meaningless. But I believe the courts will generally accept as proper reference THE LAST COMPLETE PUBLISHED STANDARD which wasn&#039;t denied by an organization. An incomplete lesser standard is generally unacceptable.</p><p><br /></p><p>Our discussions are believed futile/foolish. I won&#039;t try to dissuade you with believed facts, but anticipate an opportunity for you to convince others of importance that I&#039;m &quot;really dumb/stupid, etc.&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>Good Luck, Rich</p><p><br /></p><p>P.S. It may behoove you to locate a copy of my reference, which was stated within to be the resource, after numerous prior attempts, in eliminating the general subjectivity experienced for grading all U.S. coins before that date (1793 to present). It was stated to be a 4 year project in conjunction with the A.N.A., numerous knowledgeable experts and individuals to be the &quot;Official ANA Grading System&quot;.[/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