Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;eddiespin, post: 4240373, member: 4920&quot;]Doug, I don’t accept this “artificial” thing. It’s as simple as that with me. All that does is introduces a state of mind element that judges the coin based, not what on one’s eyes can see, but on what one’s “mind’s eye” ”sees,” and that’s where all the funny business starts. When you take your eyes off the coin and judge it rather with your mind’s eye, your imagination is the standard you’re judging with. It’s just like the trouble so many even seasoned collectors still have on the grade of a coin they happened to come by in circulation. They take their eyes off the condition of the coin for what their mind’s eye “knows” to judge the grade as “circulated.“ I keep my eyes on the face of the coin, and I don’t play mind games when I’m grading a coin. If the toning is unappealing to me, so be it, and I’m the less inclined to be interested for it. There’s certain toning I like, and certain I don’t like. In each of those events, I couldn’t care less how the toning got there. As long as it’s not nail polish or spray paint, the mode of onset is entirely irrelevant, and the coin is still grade-worthy and collectible. Neither do I collect nor grade coins based on arbitrary opinions, however “expert” or not. I collect and grade based on what my eyes can see, not on what my mind’s eye may surmise. My eyes can see the toning, and I judge it accordingly, based on whether I like it, not anyone’s wild imagination. And if I have to say, that’s just me, then that’s the way it is, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.[/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