Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Mint Director James Ross Snowden's Comments On Varieties
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Drusus, post: 394994, member: 6370"]Thats your opinion...its not like I have never read about varieties. I simply came to the conclusion that it contributed little I found worthwhile. This does not mean all must bend to my opinions on this matter...its just an opinion that obviously differs from your own.</p><p> </p><p><b>Rewards should, and do come to those who put forth directed effort, otherwise effort would be fruitless in all endeavors, and therefore worthless.</b></p><p> </p><p>This statement just does not make any sense. Simply because effort is put forth does not mean rewards will be forth coming or that it is worthwhile...that doesnt mean other efforts will not be rewarding simply because this one isnt, its not a case of all or nothing and black and white... <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> If one endeavor proves not to be worthwhile or rewarding, that doesnt mean ALL endeavors would be fruitless...nor are all endeavors worthwhile simply because you put effort into it, some fail, others succeed but bring no reward.</p><p> </p><p>Also, if ANYTHING new that is introduced is an innovation and there are no other requirements to be called innovative like it being positive or important...then I guess it was innovative quite some time ago when people first started searching, collecting and cataloging varieties. Also that means innovation is not always worthwhile, good, positive, or worth keeping but can also be either unimportant or negative. For instance I would never have characterized 'new coke' as innovative as it was a huge failure an most people simply did not like it. Under that strict definition I guess it would be innovative thus one would need to qualify innovation as something that is either important or beneficial innovation (good), negative (bad) innovation, and possibly innovations that are, on the whole, inconsequential...I would say the subject we are discussing would be the later...</p><p> </p><p>These are just opinions of course and I am not trying to be insulting...I am sure some people dont care for the way I approach collecting, and certainly there are MANY people who dont care or understand why people collect coins at all!! I simply agreed with the original thought expressed by Mr. Snowden (though I dont think selfish was the right wording) and didnt think I was a 'slimebag' for agreeing with him...<img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Drusus, post: 394994, member: 6370"]Thats your opinion...its not like I have never read about varieties. I simply came to the conclusion that it contributed little I found worthwhile. This does not mean all must bend to my opinions on this matter...its just an opinion that obviously differs from your own. [B]Rewards should, and do come to those who put forth directed effort, otherwise effort would be fruitless in all endeavors, and therefore worthless.[/B] This statement just does not make any sense. Simply because effort is put forth does not mean rewards will be forth coming or that it is worthwhile...that doesnt mean other efforts will not be rewarding simply because this one isnt, its not a case of all or nothing and black and white... :) If one endeavor proves not to be worthwhile or rewarding, that doesnt mean ALL endeavors would be fruitless...nor are all endeavors worthwhile simply because you put effort into it, some fail, others succeed but bring no reward. Also, if ANYTHING new that is introduced is an innovation and there are no other requirements to be called innovative like it being positive or important...then I guess it was innovative quite some time ago when people first started searching, collecting and cataloging varieties. Also that means innovation is not always worthwhile, good, positive, or worth keeping but can also be either unimportant or negative. For instance I would never have characterized 'new coke' as innovative as it was a huge failure an most people simply did not like it. Under that strict definition I guess it would be innovative thus one would need to qualify innovation as something that is either important or beneficial innovation (good), negative (bad) innovation, and possibly innovations that are, on the whole, inconsequential...I would say the subject we are discussing would be the later... These are just opinions of course and I am not trying to be insulting...I am sure some people dont care for the way I approach collecting, and certainly there are MANY people who dont care or understand why people collect coins at all!! I simply agreed with the original thought expressed by Mr. Snowden (though I dont think selfish was the right wording) and didnt think I was a 'slimebag' for agreeing with him...;)[/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
US Coins Forum
>
Mint Director James Ross Snowden's Comments On Varieties
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...