Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 905187, member: 112&quot;]How can anybody interpret these comments - </p><p><br /></p><p><b>&quot;but no major ones&quot;&nbsp; </b></p><p><b><br /></b></p><p><b>&quot;Light and scattered without major distracting marks in prime focal areas.&quot;</b></p><p><br /></p><p>&nbsp;- to mean that major marks are allowed sometimes ?</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Based on what ? Please quote for me the passage in the established standards, either of them, that says you can or should do this ?</p><p><br /></p><p>If you cannot, then it is something that you decided on your own. And we don&#039;t have, nor should we have, the luxury of doing that.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes it is a good example. And it speaks directly to the question at hand. It very plainly illustrates that the established grading standards were ignored.</p><p><br /></p><p>So let me ask you a different but similar question. Say you took one of the MS69 Morgans already slabbed. You crack it out and then take another Morgan and bang the edge down on the cheek of the 69 Morgan leaving two deep reed marks, worse than those on raider&#039;s coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>What would that 69 grade now ? 68, 67 ? No, by your own admission it could not even be a 67, just like raider&#039;s coin should not be a 67. But could it be a 65 ? Do you see my point ?</p><p><br /></p><p>If you say yes, it could be a 65, you are making arbitrary judgements based on your own personal opinion instead of established standards. You are <u>choosing</u> to ignore the established standards because you want to !</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>No, adhering to firm rules, established standards, gives us a level playing field. It means that all are judged under the same rules, the same sense of fairness and equality. </p><p><br /></p><p>But I do agree that there the standards do have a level of ambiguity and that it is there for a reason. That reason is to allow for things like better qulaity of luster and eye appeal.</p><p><br /></p><p>But with certain things, very specific things, like the limitations placed on the criteria for an MS65 grade or better - there is no ambiguity. They wrote the standards that way for a very specific reason, and that reason was to remove any ambiguity for that one specific point.</p><p><br /></p><p>And we should follow those standards.[/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