Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dougsmit, post: 2297264, member: 19463&quot;]I have expressed before my minority opinion that IF you are the kind of person who wants an RIC number you should buy RIC.&nbsp; I do not like the practice of deriving numbers from sources you do not have.&nbsp; That included snagging numbers from auction listings and Dane&#039;s online spreadsheets.&nbsp; Without looking up the coin in the book itself, you run the risk of missing some distinction between two numbers based on some detail you did not know was important.&nbsp; I am not suggesting everyone should buy a thousand dollar set of books but I am suggesting that a proper ID of a coin doe not require a catalog reference that may or may not be correct.&nbsp; I get a lot of good out of the RIC, BMC and other standard references in my library but having a number from those books means a lot less to me than understanding the significance of the various details listed or explained in those works.&nbsp; When you consider the differences between various RIC volumes in how they assigned numbers, it is hard to take the matter seriously.&nbsp; RIC V is probably the worst with some numbers allowing a dozen variations but its problems can not be completely written off as just &quot;out of date&quot;.&nbsp; I do record numbers in some of my cataloging but I regret the number of people who seem to worship them.[/QUOTE]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