PNG votes to repeal stricter ban on coin doctoring

[Frank Provasek]

The Jan 31 Coin World reports that the Professional Numismatists Guild has dropped the expanded definition of "coin doctoring" that was adopted just six months ago. The vote was 45 to 2, with only Steve Ivy and Mike Fuljenz supporting the stricter language. John Feigenbaum stated "This is McCarthyism - It's not PNG's torch to bear, to decide who is a coin doctor and who is not."

 

Just incredible.

 

[TonerGuy]

For those of us that dont know the language ... does anyone know or have a link to the 2 descriptions ?

[okbustchaser]

For those of us that dont know the language ... does anyone know or have a link to the 2 descriptions ?

 

 

 

From Frank's post ATS...

 

Coin doctoring is the action of a person or the enabling of another to alter a coin’s surface or appearance, usually to diminish or conceal defects, and thereby represent the condition or value of a coin as being superior to its actual condition or value. Among the practices defined as doctoring are effacing hairlines by polishing or manipulating the surfaces of proof coins, applying substances to the surface of coins to hide marks and defects, hiding marks or otherwise changing the appearance of a coin by adding toning, adding chemicals or otherwise manipulating the surfaces to create “cameo” frost on the devices of proof coins, and making a coin appear more fully struck by re-engraving portions of the devices, such as re-engraving bands on the reverse of a Mercury Dime or adding head detail to a Standing Liberty Quarter. Altering dates or mintmarks or other struck portions of a coin to make it appear to be from a mint date or type other than that of origin, and altering business strike coins to make them resemble proof issues are also examples of coin doctoring. This definition is not intended to be all-inclusive, but only illustrative of forms of coin doctoring.

 

The defining of the undefinable. I would have voted to remove the language also.

 

 

[James_OldeTowne]

Ditto. Such loosely worded language does nothing more than confuse collectors and throw gasoline on a fire that's already out of control. For that matter, "coin doctor" is a phrase that absolutely should not appear in any such definition. It's a phrase that's only used to invoke an emotional reaction.

 

Rather, a useful definition should discuss degrees of alteration of coins, and at what level such alteration is acceptable.

 

I personally think the PNG is one of the most useless organizations in numismatic existence, but numerous members are extremely valuable members of the numismatic community, and shouldn't have to be burdened by certain ridiculous PNG activities, such as putting forth frivolous definitions like that one.

[TonerGuy]

The definition covers dipping so I assume that was one big reason it was pulled...

 

Cant change an industry wide practice... we gotta have "pretty" coins to sell.

[WoodenJefferson]

Laura of Legend is going to go ballistic, there's going to be a mushroom cloud over the mid-west.

[Conder101]

I'm curious what the vote was six months ago when they adopted the definition?

[$ilverHawk]

I don't care what the vote was. As a collector what concerns me most is that the TPG s and ANA as well as PNG cannot clearly describe what actions consitute the alteration of a coin.

 

We as collectors look to the aforementioned organizations to establish a framework by which we can determine the true state/value of a coin.

 

While the debate goes on the TPG s still play in the gray area and give their blessings to an altered coin or decline based on what I must assume is an arbitary rationale. Hey they are in it to make money through submissions.

 

It is time that ANA, a US Government Chartered institution, step up and clearly outline exactly what actions constitutes the alteration of a coin.

 

 

 

$ilverHawk

[Tradedollarnut]

John Feigenbaum stated "This is McCarthyism - It's not PNG's torch to bear, to decide who is a coin doctor and who is not."

 

Couldn't disagree more ... in fact, I just lost a lot of respect that I used to have for him over that [mis]statement.

 

 

[$ilverHawk]

Precisely, who the coin doctor is doesn't matter. It's the coin in question that matters. Take the personification out of the equation.

 

Is the coin altered per ANA guidelines or not?

 

ANA, no guidelines? Why not?

 

BTW I am forwarding an inquiry to ANA requesting their commentary regarding the ANA definition of altered coins.

 

I will post the response.

 

$ilverHawk

[James_OldeTowne]

John Feigenbaum stated "This is McCarthyism - It's not PNG's torch to bear, to decide who is a coin doctor and who is not."

He's absolutely right, of course. The PNG needs to discuss what defines coin alteration of a coin, since that is a neutral term that can be fairly well defined. The term lacks the emotional bias of a term like "coin doctor". The truth is that the latter is used only to be divisive among the numismatic community, and that's the last thing we need.

 

"Coin alteration" gets directly to the heart of the differences between cleaning and conservation, as well.

[Tradedollarnut]

No, he's absolutely wrong. There are PNG members that are well known coin doctors and they just want to put their head in the sand.

 

Either get rid of the mission statement about making the hobby safer, or grow some balls and make a stand,

[James_OldeTowne]

No, he's absolutely wrong. There are PNG members that are well known coin doctors and they just want to put their head in the sand.

 

Either get rid of the mission statement about making the hobby safer, or grow some balls and make a stand,

Shouldn't PNG stand for unaltered coins? That is, coins altered in any way from their present, natural state?

 

Of course, it'll never happen. I have dealt with enough PNG dealers to know that in actuality, a large part of their membership couldn't care less about collectors.

[Tradedollarnut]

Why would they stand for that?

 

I agree - they don't give a damn about collectors as an organization.

[gmarguli]

No, he's absolutely wrong. There are PNG members that are well known coin doctors and they just want to put their head in the sand.

 

And there are anti-PNG posters that are also coin doctors. The dark stain is somewhat distracting, but I'll try an acetone bath before submitting it.

 

 

Don't you know that coin doctoring is wrong. Don't you know that you are harming a coin for future generations. Are you going to tell the next owner that the coin has been altered from its natural state? What happens when that next owner sells it?

 

Very disappointed Bruce. You a coin doctor.

[Tradedollarnut]

. Nice try. Acetone is inert with regards to metal. And even if it wasn't, dipping is hardly doctoring. Overdipping, perhaps.

 

[Dudley the 1st]

I read the story also and had to breath deep and considers the two sides of this coin story. Odd that only two members voted to maintain the more recent revised definition . For the most part I believe the newer definition was appropriate given the technological advances in " Coin Doctoring " .

 

 

[gmarguli]

. Nice try. Acetone is inert with regards to metal. And even if it wasn't, dipping is hardly doctoring. Overdipping, perhaps.

 

Dipping is absolutely doctoring. It is the use of a chemical to change the appearance of the coin. It might be a widely accepted form of doctoring, but it is still doctoring.

 

Clearly you were hoping to change the appearance of the coin by removing the toning spot with acetone. Therefore, it is clear that acetone does alter the coin. At the very least it was your hope that the acetone would remove the spot and alter the appearance of the coin. Acetone use = doctoring.

 

 

 

[mommam17]

I thought it was a stain on the coin. Acetone does not remove toning, does it?

[Tradedollarnut]

I thought it was a stain on the coin. Acetone does not remove toning, does it?

 

This is correct. Greg is just being... Greg.

[gmarguli]

I thought it was a stain on the coin. Acetone does not remove toning, does it?

 

This is correct. Greg is just being... Greg.

 

1) Acetone can affect the surface coloration of a coin. I know this to be 100% true.

 

2) Bruce is just being Bruce (i.e. I hate coin doctors.... at least when they don't benefit me or when it's not me).

 

 

[Tradedollarnut]

Whatever. I've used it three or 4 times on silver as a surface contaminent remover and it's never changed anything. But you're welcome to your opinion ... as usual.

[physics-fan3.14]

Greg, I've never seen a verifiable report of a coin this happened to or scientific explanation why acetone would change the color of a coin. And I put every raw coin I ever purchase through an acetone bath.

[Barry-migration]

. Nice try. Acetone is inert with regards to metal. And even if it wasn't, dipping is hardly doctoring. Overdipping, perhaps.

You hit the nail on the head with your statement above.

 

Analyze your statement from a layman's perspective:

A little dipping is OK, but too much is bad? Huh?

 

IMO, doctoring is ANYTHING that affects the metallic SURFACE of the coin, which includes dipping (but not acetone.)

[James_OldeTowne]

Greg, I've never seen a verifiable report of a coin this happened to or scientific explanation why acetone would change the color of a coin. And I put every raw coin I ever purchase through an acetone bath.

I am absolutely positive that acetone can change the color of some coins -- because it has happened (unexpectedly) to me. But it is certainly harmless to most. I suppose that there are a few coins that have oddball chemicals on them, whether placed there intentionally or not, and that the acetone reacts differently in those cases than it would for most typical scenarios.

 

I'd guess it's safe to use on 95% of coins, if not more, but there is that 5% (or whatever) that see a bad reaction.

[Conder101]

Right, acetone does not remove toning, so the only way it would do anything to the dark stain is if the stain is actually something that is just stuck to the coin. And since acetone does not affect the coin itself, it can actually be a good thing because it can remove contaminates that would cause damage to the coin in the future. It is to doctoring the same way that slabbing is, something being done to the coin to prevent future damage.

[gmarguli]

Right, acetone does not remove toning, so the only way it would do anything to the dark stain is if the stain is actually something that is just stuck to the coin. And since acetone does not affect the coin itself, it can actually be a good thing because it can remove contaminates that would cause damage to the coin in the future. It is to doctoring the same way that slabbing is, something being done to the coin to prevent future damage.

 

But toning is just lying on the surface of a coin, not part of the coin, so dipping it to remove that which is lying on top of the coin also isn't doctoring.

 

Neither is ATing a coin as it is only adding something to lay on top of the surface.

 

Odd how much bull mess can be spread when we want to define actions that are wrong except when we do them.

[Tradedollarnut]

Under Greg's definition, washing a coin with soap and water is doctoring. Thus, he's full of mess.

[gmarguli]

Under Greg's definition, washing a coin with soap and water is doctoring. Thus, he's full of mess.

 

Must have hit a hypocritical nerve with you. Don't worry Bruce, I'll suggest a new definition of coin doctoring for the PNG: It's only doctoring when someone else does it.

[okbustchaser]

Washing a coin with soap and water is doctoring...it's just a (currently) market acceptable form of doctoring.

 

Therein lies the problem. It is impossible to create a written definition of market acceptability since the market itself is constantly changing.