Ping: Reid Goldsborough.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
> As far as school work, correct me Chrysta if I am wrong please.
> We were told to use ANY source, but, we needed to footnote our source.
>Not just name of but edition, date of publ, vol# if there was one,
>publisher, page and anything else thatt was available to direct someone
>else to the EXACT source.
We've been through all this before. There are many different kinds of
writing and many different kinds of information. You're describing
above academic writing. That's only one kind. And even with academic
writing you don't have to attribute all information. Information
that's available from multiple sources or is commonly held or
common-sensical doesn't have to be attributed in even the stuffiest
academic journals.
--
Coin Collecting: Consumer Guide: http://rg.cointalk.org/guide/
Bogos: Counterfeit Coins: http://rg.cointalk.org/bogos/
Glomming: Coin Connoisseurship: http://rg.cointalk.org/glom/
from West of the Pecos
>From: Reid Goldsborough reid...@netaxs.com
>writing you don't have to attribute all information. Information
>that's available from multiple sources or is commonly held or
>common-sensical
You do not know what you are talking about. You have rolled together two
different standards. COMMON SENSE assertions such as "the sun rises in the
East" do not need attribution because we can all easily test them.
Information from MULTIPLE SOURCES is just that. And if you have multiple
sources of equal standing you might choose one or the other, but the careful
researcher would cite BOTH or ALL.
I have taught writing in college.
My reply here to you is only to prevent the demise of some hapless person who
thinks that as a syndicated columnist and a published writer for COINAGE and
COIN WORLD Reid Goldsborough is an authority on copyrights.
Michael E. Marotta
----------------------------
Tradurre e tradire.
---------------------------
from West of the Pecos
>From: "Bill Fordler" billf...@hotmail.com
>Reid, I'm wondering if Jayson Blair studied journalism from you? Thanks.
Subject: Re: The World's Two Most Exciting Coins
From: Reid Goldsborough reid...@netaxs.com
Date: 5/16/2003 6:14 PM Mountain Daylight Time
1. Lydian trite. The very first coin (depending on how you define
"coin"), minted around 600 BC, of electrum (gold/silver alloy), a coin
that's as old and evocative (roaring lion design with mysterious nose
"wart") as it is controversial (the first coin may have been the first
numismatic scam, an official state-sanctioned scam at that). Pricey
coin, though not especially rare, just in great demand. This is the
one coin I'd call "The Coin."
Being attracted to fake coins, hoaxes, copies, and forgeries, Reid Goldsborough
sees this in others where it does not exist. We have strong reason to believe
that the coinage of Lydia STANDARDIZED at a gold-silver ratio lower than that
of much of the naturally occuring nuggets in the Pactolus River. The most
likely explanation is that the market values of gold and silver had changed in
the perhaps 50 years and at least one generation between the first Lydian coins
and these.
Like all of the nasty details of numismatics, this subject is as complicated as
you want it to be. I have outlined the history of ELECTRUM for an article that
will appear in THE CELATOR.
The easiest general claim is as stated above, that the ratio of gold to silver
in the COINED electrum of the Lydian kings was standardized lower than much of
the naturally-occuring -- and WIDELY VARYING -- electrum and most importantly,
this was not a "scam" on the part of the kings. The only scams are in the mind
of Reid Goldsborough who admits that he is fascinated by scams, drawn to fakes,
and attracted to forgeries.
The Lydian electrum one-third stater with the lion with a "nose wart" is _NOT_
the first coin.
mark
> As far as school work, correct me Chrysta if I am wrong please.
> We were told to use ANY source, but, we needed to footnote our source.
>Not just name of but edition, date of publ, vol# if there was one,
>publisher, page and anything else thatt was available to direct someone
>else to the EXACT source.
While their are a couple of accepted formats for footnotes and bibliographies,
their purpose is to credit sources of ideas that are not the author's,
particularly, but not limited to, direct quotes from those sources.
Newspapers, traditionally, have run a bit more fast and loose. The primary
reason is that reporter in question had usually either witnessed or interviewed
witnesses to the events he was reporting. Most "news" is simply current
events.
Numismatic writings, however, are more often than not a review of the past. I
am dreadfully disappointed at the lack of mention of sources in many columns
and articles appearing in Numismatic News, Coin World, and even the
Numismatist.
--
mark
Ankaaz
"The easiest general claim is as stated above..."
Again, Reid does not surprise us with his penchant for numismatic banality.
Despite his use of words such as "evocative" and "controversial," Reid, more
often than not, tows the party line. Has he ever exhibited an original thought
or theory in any numismatic forum?
I'm looking forward to your electrum article. At a local coin show last year,
a electrum coin caught my eye, but...
For now, it's still on my "love-to-have have" list.
Anka Z
Co-president of the once thriving, but now defunct, Tommy John Fan Club.
Go, Lake County Captains!
Reid Goldsborough
of the Pecos) wrote:
>Being attracted to fake coins, hoaxes, copies, and forgeries, Reid Goldsborough
>sees this in others where it does not exist.
It's far from only me, with these Lydian trites. You really, really
need to read up on this.
>We have strong reason to believe
>that the coinage of Lydia STANDARDIZED at a gold-silver ratio lower than that
>of much of the naturally occuring nuggets in the Pactolus River.
"We"? Who the heck is "we"? Do you mean A. Ramage, P.T. Craddock, Paul
T. Keyser, David D. Clark, Christine Thompson, Robert W. Wallace,
Donald Kagan, etc., etc. They've all written about this recently, and
I have some news for you: There's no "we." What there is is much
disagreement over the nature of these coins, their origin and purpose.
>The only scams are in the mind
>of Reid Goldsborough who admits that he is fascinated by scams, drawn to fakes,
>and attracted to forgeries.
You're arguing mindlessly again, just being a foolish contrarian. The
fact is many people feel that the earliest electrum coins were a
state-sactioned scam, including most recently Keyser and Clark in
their 2001 ANS article and earlier T.C. Carney, S.H. Frankel, G.M.A.
Hanfmann, and J.C. Waldbaum, among others. S. Bolin was the first to
suggest this, quite famously too, back in 1958.
I hope you've included this in your article because if you haven't,
you've done another very superficial job.
Ankaaz
Great lifetime coinage was entirely original. Remember? You even corrected an
arithmetic mistake I made before publication, after much prodding on my part to
get you to reveal what the mistake was rather than just boasting that you had
found it."
Yes, I do remember, and isn't it funny that you mention "prodding" me for more
input?
During my college freshman year, I met my old (and very insightful) eigth grade
nun who asked me my major. Upon hearing that it was math she said, "Oh, Ann!
You were never good in math!" I wasn't. I became an English major soon
afterward.
So... for someone on the verge of publishing an article on Alexandrine coinage
(the premise of which was based on simple grade school math) to prod me (a
woefully inept would-be-math-major with positively zero mathematical acumen)
for more information is not only ludicrous, but quite telling. Calculating
percentages of lifetime/posthumous coinage isn't rocket science. But prodding
others for information is your modus operandi, and that's what you did to me in
typical Reid fashion.
As for exhibiting originality in your articles, perhaps I should have been more
clear. I was not questioning whether or not the work was yours, I was
questioning if you've ever proposed an original, ground-breaking, iconoclastic,
paradigm-shifting, thinking out-of-the-box type theory, which was based on an
-assimilation- of knowledge gleaned from observation, primary sources, and the
works of numismatic scholars.
I stand by our Alexander article. We've received both criticism and
congratulations. More importantly, the article has provoked discussion and
controversy... more than I'd ever imagined. And that's a good thing.
High Plains Writer
> You taught in college and now you're a security guard.
Thirteen years separate the two careers. A year ago, I got hired as a
peer level guard for concerts, part-time, on call. I moved into the
uniformed division in September. I went fulltime. I work as a
dispatcher. I work as a trainer for report writing. Today, I helped
the trainers certify new hires in unarmed defense and also baton. I
am certified in both and in both straight and collapsible batons, of
course. I am also certified by the New Mexico Law Enforcement Academy
in supervision, first aid, and computer crime investigation.
When Gulf War II broke out, I was assigned to guard a fuel depot.
What did you do in the last war?
We honor the police officers and fire fighters who perished in the
Twin Towers -- and rightfully so. In addition, there were these
people:
Patrick Adams – 60, Brooklyn, NY, Security officer, Fuji Bank
Godwin Ajala – 33, New York, NY, Security officer, Summit Security
Services
Andrew J. Bailey – 29, New York, NY, Security supervisor, Marsh &
McLennan
Lawrence F. Boisseau – 36, Freehold, NJ, Fire safety director, OCS
Security
Francisco Bourdier – 40, New York, NY, Security guard, Deutsche Bank
Larry Bowman - 46, New York, N.Y., security officer, Summit Security
Services
Edward Calderon – 43, Jersey City, NJ, Security guard, Port Authority
Mannie Leroy Clark – 54, New York, NY, Security guard
Francisco Cruz – 48, Staten Island, NY, Security officer, Summit
Security Services
Denease Conley - 43, New York, N.Y., Summit Security
Samuel Fields – 36, New York, NY, Security officer, Summit Security
Services
John R. Fisher - 46, Bayonne, N.J., security consultant, Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey
Richard Fitzsimons – 57, Lynbrook, NY, Fire safety inspector, OCS
Security
Ervin Gailliard – 42, New York, NY, Security officer, Summit Security
Services
Jorge Luis Morron Garcia, 38, New York, N.Y., security officer, Summit
Security Services
Charles Gregory John – 44, Security officer, Royston and Zamani
Philip Thomas Hayes - 67, East Northport, NY, Fire safety director,
OCS Security
Ronald Hoerner – 58, Massapequa Park, NY, Security manager, Summit
Security Services
Mohammed Jawara - MAS Security
Douglas G. Karpiloff – 53, Mamaroneck, NY, Security director, Port
Authority
Barry Kirschbaum – 53, Staten Island, NY, Security manager, Marsh &
McLennan
Leon Lebor, Security guard, Summit Security Services
Daniel Lugo – 45, New York, NY, Security officer, Summit Security
Services
Anthony Luparello Jr., 63, SecurityWguard, American Building
Maintenance
Sara Manley - 31, New York, N.Y., vice president and senior security
analyst, Fred Alger Management
Robert Martinez - 24, Long Island City, N.Y., security officer, Summit
Security Services
Robert J. Mayo – 46, Marlboro, NJ, Fire safety director, OCS Security
Stanley McCaskill – 47, New York, NY, Security guard, Advantage
Security
John P. O'Neill – 50, NY, Security, Silverstein Partners
Alexander Ortiz - Security guard, Grubb & Ellis Inc
Rick Rescorla - 62, head of security for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
Esmerlin Salcedo – 36, New York, NY, Security officer, Summit Security
Services
Nolbert Salomon – 33, Security guard
Francis Joseph Trombino – 68, Clifton, NJ, Security guard, Brinks
Jorge Velazquez – 47, Passaic, NJ, Security specialist, Morgan Stanley
William Wren – 61, Lynbrook, NJ, Resident manager, OCS Security
In the last year, I have also worked as an office temporary in
advertising and marketing. I was a retail clerk at the Atomic Energy
Museum Store. I taught middle school as a substitute. Whatever I do,
I take myself and my work very seriously.
Michael
Alan & Erin Williams
>
> Reid Goldsborough <reid...@netaxs.com> wrote
> > You taught in college and now you're a security guard.
>
> In the last year, I have also worked as an office temporary in
> advertising and marketing. I was a retail clerk at the Atomic Energy
> Museum Store. I taught middle school as a substitute. Whatever I do,
> I take myself and my work very seriously.
I've met some real morons in some very high places, and some people
whose expertise and comprehension far exceed their 'station in life'.
People that worship job titles, degrees, size of paycheck and length of
credential tend to be the former rather than the latter, IMO.
Alan
'I was looking for work when I found this job'
Jim
thinking....
>I've met some real morons in some very high places, and some people whose
expertise and comprehension far exceed their 'station in life'. People that
worship job titles, degrees, size of paycheck and length of credential tend to
be the former rather than the latter, IMO.<
"I" couldn't have said it better and wish I had......8^)
Amen once again.......
Always here for my fellow syngraphist or oenophile.
--=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=----=*=--
from West of the Pecos
> Date: 5/17/2003 8:08 PM Mountain Daylight Time
> I've met some real morons in some very high places, and some people whose
expertise and comprehension far exceed their 'station in life'. People that
worship job titles, degrees, size of paycheck and length of credential tend to
be the former rather than the latter, IMO.
> From: jston...@aol.comprosit (Jim)
> Date: 5/17/2003 8:17 PM Mountain Daylight Time
> "I" couldn't have said it better and wish I had......8^) Amen once again.
--------------
Thanks, guys, I appreciate that. We can all thank our parents for our basic
values. "Whatever you do, give it your best." and all that. One lesson came
to me in college.
I was taking a class in Victorian England at Case-Western in Cleveland and the
professor told us this. He was over there at Oxbridge or someplace, digging in
the library archives and he was introduced to "Brown" who was working on the
same subject or a related one and maybe had published already and they hit it
off. Back in the states, my professor continued the correspondence. "Dr.
Brown, Oxbridge, Merrye Olde A12 3BC." The reply comes back: Yes, indeed old
man, well done, pip-pip and cheerio and I am not a "Doctor." So, the next
letter goes out to "Professor Brown." Well, you know how this ends, so I won't
bore you.
Michael
Larry Calder
to give voice to, so to speak, the opinion that is on the minds of the vast
majority of readers of this thread.
Reid is the only person who could engage in an argument with a stump and find
himself on the losing end.
hiz other account
PORCOS NON ABLOCAMUS,Y'all
Larry
http://www.texascoinstuff.com
EVERYBODY'S SOMEBODY IN LUCKENBACH
]http://tinyurl.com/ae63
Nick Knight
>Reid is the only person who could engage in an argument with a stump and
>find himself on the losing end.
Are we disqualifying those who would actually provide false and/or altered
text to the stump in order to "prove" victory? Or who might curse at the
stump, and find much interest in the stump's sex life, and while never
actually desiring "victory" as normals would see it, still gets off on it?
Or who might plant pretty/fluffy flowers All Around, light some candles,
blow some bubbles, and remember Better Times in th 70's, ranting
"creatively" and seemingly endlessly, boring the tree to a fate worse than
that already bestowed upon it? I'm sure these folks all see themselves as
beating the stump, when that's all they're really doing.
I suppose old Mr. Morgan could sit on the stump and declare himself "a
winner". He does it all the time. Different eyes, of course, see much
different things. A "stump" would be an object for some to look up to.
Here.
Nick
Jim
<snip>
While Nancy would be the only person to get in an argument with herself and
bore both of themselves to death.
Oh wait, as an homage to the GED from Cleveland, make that "boar"......
from West of the Pecos
>Date: 5/18/2003 8:35 AM Mountain Daylight Time
>Reid is the only person who could engage in an argument with a stump and find
himself on the losing end.
Humor at someone else's expense is always appreciated. I saw a T-shirt the
other day that said: "It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's
hilarious!" So, I have to admit that the slings and arrows are almost as
painful to watch as they are to get.
But you know what, pard, you get off the llanos and prairies up into the high
sierra and the chapparals where the trees are and you see a whole other kind of
ecology. I mean, most people think that a stump is dead, but you get into the
woods aways and look about you and you realize that a dead stump supports a lot
of life. Look around at what lives on a dead stump sometime and tell me what
you see and if you listen you might hear what sounds like talking.
Michael
Moseying along on Old Paint
Reid Goldsborough
>Yes, I do remember, and isn't it funny that you mention "prodding" me for more
>input?
You make this so much more complicated that it was. I posted the
preliminary result of my statistical analysis here. You said you found
an arithmetic mistake -- you're right, a simple mistake in addition. I
asked what it was. You wouldn't tell me. Unbelievable. You said you
found an error but refused to divulge what it was. I asked about two
more times what it was, so I wouldn't have to spend many hours redoing
the entire study since I couldn't find the mistake myself. You finally
told me. That was very big of you, very generous, very gracious.
>I stand by our Alexander article. We've received both criticism and
>congratulations. More importantly, the article has provoked discussion and
>controversy... more than I'd ever imagined. And that's a good thing.
See, this is the problem. You refuse to reexamine your faulty premise.
You want everybody else to throw out the accepted wisdom, but you
refuse to acknowledge that you may have gotten it wrong yourself. In
actuality, the entire premise of your article was faulty. NOBODY with
any knowledge of this area agrees with you, nobody who's written
before and nobody who writes today, and for good reason.
With the utmost hubris, you said your "paradigm-shifting" position was
"obvious," then you and Michael duck and duck and duck the core
question that completely invalidates it: "How is it that it's obvious
that the image of Herakles on Alexander's lifetime coinage was
Alexander himself when this very SAME image appeared on coins before
he was born?" Michael, without any credibility, said he didn't have
the space to address this issue in his 5,000-word article. Truth is,
he didn't look at the coins, didn't know the numismatics, focused on
the history, extrapolating it wildly, while ignoring the numismatics.
Michael didn't address this issue either in his follow-up letter to
the Celator. He refuses to address it online. He now says, also
without one iota of credibility, that he doesn't have time to address
it.
So how about you addressing it?
Craton
> Look around at what lives on a dead stump sometime and tell me what
> you see and if you listen you might hear what sounds like talking.
>
> Michael
Especially if you eat some of the fungi that may be growing on that
stump! ;)
--
Jason Craton ---- CONECA N-3407 --- WINS #5
---------------------------
Interested in error coins?
http://www.error-coins.com - A work in progress (lack of progress
really).
Alan & Erin Williams
>
> from West of the Pecos wrote:
> > Look around at what lives on a dead stump sometime and tell me what
> > you see and if you listen you might hear what sounds like talking.
> >
> > Michael
>
> Especially if you eat some of the fungi that may be growing on that
> stump! ;)
>
;-)
Alan
'ambrosial'
Craton
> >
> > Especially if you eat some of the fungi that may be growing on that
> > stump! ;)
> >
> Silly Cyber!
>
> ;-)
>
> Alan
> 'ambrosial'
http://home.pacifier.com/~craton/Psilocybe%20cyanescens/Image4.jpg
Ankaaz
"You make this so much more complicated that it was. I posted the
preliminary result of my statistical analysis here. You said you found an
arithmetic mistake -- you're right, a simple mistake in addition. I asked what
it was. You wouldn't tell me. Unbelievable. You said you found an error but
refused to divulge what it was. I asked about two more times what it was, so I
wouldn't have to spend many hours redoing the entire study since I couldn't
find the mistake myself. You finally told me. That was very big of you, very
generous, very gracious."
What a whiner. You couldn't find a simple mistake and you needed to make -me-
feel guilty for refusing to divulge the correction? Wait. Lemme get out my
violin...
"Michael didn't address this issue either in his follow-up letter to the
Celator. He refuses to address it online. He now says, also without one iota of
credibility, that he doesn't have time to address it.
So how about you addressing it?"
Michael did address this quite well in various fora, including the online
discussion group NUMISM-L just a few days ago. Surely, you remember that.
As for myself... I'd rather have a root canal than debate anything with you.
Sorry, Reid, but you're just not worth my time and effort. I'm sure that
others here would agree with me.
A.Gent
"from West of the Pecos" <mike194...@aol.comoesta> wrote in message
news:20030518124034...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >From: aloha...@aol.complicated (Larry Calder)
> >Date: 5/18/2003 8:35 AM Mountain Daylight Time
>
the
> other day that said: "It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then it's
> hilarious!"
LOL!
Thanks for that, Michael.
Alan & Erin Williams
>
(snip)
>
> As for myself... I'd rather have a root canal than debate anything with you.
> Sorry, Reid, but you're just not worth my time and effort. I'm sure that
> others here would agree with me.
I agree with you. My experience in 'debating Reid' was frustrating in
the extreme. Rather than quoting and responding, he paraphrases and
twists your position. Having invented an opinion for you, he then
denigrates you for that invented position.
Given his facility at that tactic, I'm surprised he needs RCC at all,
since he has proven himself entirely capable of sustaining a discussion
in which he is the only poster, under various 'noms de lunacy'.
Overall, he's made himself as welcome here as a carbon spot.
Alan
'remembers seeing a poll'
Larry Calder
>Given his facility at that tactic, I'm surprised he needs RCC at all,
>since he has proven himself entirely capable of sustaining a discussion
>in which he is the only poster, under various 'noms de lunacy'.
And on top of everything else, he is BORING!!
so ne
You're sure that others would agree with you? I'm sure you are. You
can't defend your "paradigm shifting" position, a position in diametric
opposition with what everyone who's actually studied this issue has
written over at least the past fifty years, and you now want others to
back you up on your refusal to answer a simple question.>>>
She doesn't NEED to defend anything to you. It is her educated and
researched opinion. I know nothing about this coinage and really don't
care too at the present time.
Reid asks:
Simple question, that's all it is: How can you justify your position
that it's obvious that the Herakles on Alexander's lifetime silver
coinage is Alexander himself when this very same Herakles image appeared
on coins before he was born?>>>>>
Doris
ancient but knows nothing about the coins
Newspaper headline:
POLICE STATION TOILET STOLEN....
cops have nothing to go on.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>She doesn't NEED to defend anything to you. It is her educated and
>researched opinion.
No, it's not. It's her uninformed, unresearched opinion about it. If
she had done her homework, no way would she and Michael have written
what they did, expressing it with such certainty. If you know about
it, you don't go against every, literally every, scholar on the
subject without acknowledging this, saying you're certain of your
position. If you know about them, you don't ignore coins that provide
evidence that directly refutes your position and later say you "didn't
have space" to address them. This is an old debate. Michael continues
to resurrect it, here and elsewhere, for reasons I can't fathom. I'd
think he'd just move on and let his "paradigm shift" sink into the
sea.
Bill Fordler
http://slate.msn.com/id/2082741/
Bill
Jim
>Reid, I'm wondering if Jayson Blair studied journalism from you? Thanks.<
ROTFLMAO in spades!
A keeper......!
Byron L. Reed
>"Bill Fordler" billf...@hotmail.com returns from the dead to offer.....
>
>>Reid, I'm wondering if Jayson Blair studied journalism from you? Thanks.<
>
>ROTFLMAO in spades!
>
>A keeper......!
I like the opening sentence of the third paragraph:
"The unmasking of a counterfeiter tends to
inspire busy discussions of his motive."
BLReed
Cool things: http://www.byronreed.com/byrons_collections/default.htm
Talk bust coins: http://www.byronreed.com/phpBB2/index.php
Büstezehncentstücke schütteln!
Reid Goldsborough
<billf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Reid, I'm wondering if Jayson Blair studied journalism from you?
No, he didn't.
The start of another brilliantly on-topic coin thread. Interesting how
you link to a news story about deception.
from West of the Pecos
>Date: 5/12/2003 10:41 PM Mountain Daylight Time
>>Reid, I'm wondering if Jayson Blair studied journalism from you?
>No, he didn't.
Well, actually, I thought of you, too. It was the first thing that popped into
my mind when I read the story on AOL a couple of days ago and a day before the
posts here.
I did not bring it up because:
(1) It was off-topic.
(2) You have never filed a dateline from someplace you were not and you never
"interviewed" people you really never met.
But I did think of you right away.
Michael
Phil DeMayo
>Actually, you just disappeared from
>Moneta-L after that. Were you kicked off? You came in like a storm,
>leaving a fury of wild messages, telling other people they were devil
>worshippers and so on, annoying everybody including the moderator. He
>warned you not to act there like you act here, but you continued,
>leaving one message after another. Then you disappeared. Since this
>thread is about truth, I'll ask you to tell the truth about this. No
>lying, OK? No making things up.
Pot-kettle-black
When Reid "the loose cannon" Goldsborough bragged about using his wife's eBay
account to snipe (with no intention of paying) the auctions of a seller he
suspected of being a scam artist, didn't he annoy some at Moneta-L? When he
encouraged others to create fake eBay accounts and do the same, didn't the
Moneta-L moderators tell him to take his campaign elsewhere?
++++++++++
Phil DeMayo - always here for my fellow Stooge
When bidding online always sit on your helmet
Just say NO to counterfeits
mark
>I've
>never made up a single fact in any article I've had published, not one
>fact, have never been accused of this or anything like this. And I
>don't make up facts here,
You wrote that nickels don't tone in rainbow colors.
You wrote it was ok to use a copyrighted work as a basis for a new work without
giving permission or credit.
I still very much think you made-up your conversation with the supposed lawyer
about copyrights, as the advice you supposedly got was not in accordance with
the letter of the law, and that advice totally did not address that part of the
law that was the heart of the issue: a copyright holder has exclusive rights to
all derivative works. You have yet to provide the supposed gentleman's name.
You blatantly misquoted Varitan on multiple occasions. You've blatantly
misquoted others' postings from this newsgroup.
>though I did use three pseudonyms for a week
You used over 20 over a three year period, and then went back through google
and had them all removed.
>And unlike you, I do numismatic
>research by, believe it or not, looking at coins as well as books.
You used the words of others in an article published under your name alone (and
for which you were compensated) in a periodical with national distribution
without disclosing that you did so in the article.
> I
>don't make wild leaps of extrapolation that have no basis in anything
Easily 50% of your ramblings fall under this generalization.
And all the above is without benefit of googling for specific references, which
there are pleanty more. I can post them if you'd like. Or, perhaps, you can
finally just shut the hell up about what a pristine record you have, because no
one--not even little nicky--is buying that crapola from you anymore.
--
mark
Byron L. Reed
>(2) You have never filed a dateline from someplace you were not and you never
>"interviewed" people you really never met.
But he has been other people who have filed datelines.
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>Pot-kettle-black
>
>When Reid "the loose cannon" Goldsborough bragged about using his wife's eBay
>account to snipe (with no intention of paying) the auctions of a seller he
>suspected of being a scam artist, didn't he annoy some at Moneta-L? When he
>encouraged others to create fake eBay accounts and do the same, didn't the
>Moneta-L moderators tell him to take his campaign elsewhere?
No, black and white, not pot-pettle-black. When I and others were
asked to stop talking about this huge scam on Moneta-L by the
moderator, I did. When Michael was asked by the moderator to stop
trashing other people on Moneta-L, he didn't.
And you once again are being deceptive in portraying this, withholding
key information. It wasn't just me "suspecting" this seller of being a
scam artist, it's the entire online ancient numismatic community who
knows for a fact that this is happening. And, after a brief hiatus,
this year-and-a-half long scam began being discussed again in
Moneta-L, with one person who's working with the legal authorities
just leaving another message there for people to contact him and with
others suggesting other ways to stop more people from getting cheated.
Thus far neither eBay nor the legal authorities have been effective.
This scammer continues doing what he's doing. Every time this scammer
puts up a new auction, using a brand new eBay ID, auctioning the very
same several dozen cast counterfeits all over again, with a private
three-day auction each time and even keeping his own feedback private,
another several dozen people get cheated out of sums ranging from $20
to several hundred dollars. Biggest scam in numismatics right now,
going on as we speak. You also left this out.
But providing solid, complete information isn't what you're about now,
is it? It's pissyfighting, and your pissyfighting technique, unlike
that used by a handful of others here, isn't the Big Lie, it's the
legalistic, doctrinaire scolding of others for not obeying every last
rule while you refuse to admit whether or not you obey the law.
You too might try sticking to talking about coins.
Bill Fordler
"Reid Goldsborough" <reid...@netaxs.com> wrote in message
news:q1s5cvs3gsvmu9od6...@4ax.com...
> On 13 May 2003 20:39:14 GMT, flip...@aol.compulsion (Phil DeMayo)
> wrote:
>
>
> Thus far neither eBay nor the legal authorities have been effective.
I'm not sure how we hijacked this thread into talk of an eBay scammer, but
I'll call you on this. Provide the eBay ID or (says politely) shut your
mouth. I'll look into it if you provide the ID.
Bill
Phil DeMayo
>No, black and white, not pot-pettle-black. When I and others were
>asked to stop talking about this huge scam on Moneta-L by the
>moderator, I did. When Michael was asked by the moderator to stop
>trashing other people on Moneta-L, he didn't.
Are you leaving anything out here? Are you sure you both weren't asked to drop
the matter?
>And you once again are being deceptive in portraying this, withholding
>key information. It wasn't just me "suspecting" this seller of being a
>scam artist
I'm not being deceptive at all. Who else in Moneta-L made a unilateral decision
to snipe the seller's auctions with no intention to pay? I didn't see anyone
else urge the other members of the group to do the same. As far as I know you
were the only one who was told to take the campaign elsewhere as you were
putting the board moderators in legal jeopardy with your actions.
Nick Knight
> and your pissyfighting technique, unlike
>that used by a handful of others here, isn't the Big Lie,
Uuuuhhhhhh? I suppose you might call them the "little lies", but they seem
to be rather significant Phibs to me:
http://rcc.servehttp.com/#Phib
I have two documented. I'm sure there are more, but I don't watch for them
anymore. Have I mentioned my killfiles lately? :) There's another minor
rant fitting for here/now, but alas, I need to get to bed.
Have an evening, all!
Nick
mark
> made a mistake, initially, by not
>including the word "usually."
Yes. What you don't get is that while no one expects you or anyone else to be
perfect, we are all sick of listening to you gloss over your less-than innocent
transgressions.
>The above is perfectly OK. Depending. Read the copyright law. Read
>about the fair use doctrine.
What is it with your mental block regarding context? Fair use is for purposes
of eduction or commentary (with or without satire). Derivitive works are *not*
fair use.
>Were you the one who scared George into using a fake coin as
>the basis for the RCC medal because you claimed that using a photocopy
>of a real coin from a book would be a copyright violation?
No, George said that was a condition of the manufacturer. They, at least,
understand the law.
>You come across as moronic by continuing to say this as well.
>
Why, because you say so. How about a name?
>You blatantly misquoted Varitan on multiple occasions.
>
>Now you're lying. I didn't misquote him once
Yes you did. I'll google it up this weekend for you.
>You're lying again. I did not use a single word in this article that
>anybody else wrote.
Yes you did. I'll google that up too.
>Instead of talking
>substance, instead of putting up your ideas against others' ideas, you
>lamely try to discredit people by making up lies about them.
It's called integrity, and it's not my fault if you don't have any,
--
mark
Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
>Are you leaving anything out here? Are you sure you both weren't asked to drop
>the matter?
Michael was asked to stop the innuendos and name calling.
>I'm not being deceptive at all. Who else in Moneta-L made a unilateral decision
>to snipe the seller's auctions with no intention to pay? I didn't see anyone
>else urge the other members of the group to do the same. As far as I know you
>were the only one who was told to take the campaign elsewhere as you were
>putting the board moderators in legal jeopardy with your actions.
Do you follow Moneta-L? You say you do, even though you don't collect
ancient coins and know next to nothing about them. Why is that?
Doesn't matter. But pay better attention. Over the past couple of
months a number of messages from others have advocated the very same
thing I did, which is a very commonly used tactic on eBay to stop
scammers, and also before I did as well.
Sure, it's a gray area, and I know you have a very hard time
understanding anything but the black and white. It's either right or
wrong, nothing in between, except when if comes to your own behavior.
Throughout history, when the law hasn't protected people, people have
taken the law into their own hands. There's risk here, risk to those
appointing themselves as police -- call them vigilantes -- risk they
could get themselves as well as innocents in trouble, which is why
it's better to leave things to the legal authorities and which is why
I'm not involved in this and don't advocate this any more. As I said,
I realized afterward that I was being too aggressive. But I understand
why others do this and see the benefits as well as the risks.
And spare us AGAIN your prissy nonsensical "legal jeopardy" nonsense.
Nobody is in legal jeopardy but this scammer, hopefully.
from West of the Pecos
wrote:
>Are you leaving anything out here? Are you sure you both weren't asked to drop
>the matter?
From: Reid Goldsborough reid...@netaxs.com
Date: 5/15/2003 12:47 AM Mountain Daylight Time
Michael was asked to stop the innuendos and name calling.
From: Reid Goldsborough reid...@netaxs.com
Date: 5/15/2003 1:22 AM Mountain Daylight Time
It's the lying tactic that's most despicable -- openly and unabashedly making
stuff up or repeating stuff that's not only not true but is often absurdly not
true. Doesn't
matter to them. It's just a weapon to them. Just use the lie. Withholding
information is a lie too but a lesser one, I suppose.
------------------------------------------
Michael E. Marotta from West of the Pecos now writes:
I have been reading Moneta-L for over a year under a different account
entirely. I recently signed up from an AOL account in order to post on two
topics: Copper Owls and Software. I am working on both for THE CELATOR. I got
some replies on Copper Owls and one extremely important pointer on Software --
Moneta from Numus by Thomas Schroer.
I also posted on other topics as interested me. Along the way, I posted out
takes from RCC Mark Programmer's complaints that Reid Goldsborough borrowed
very heavily from RCC input without properly crediting it. Reid Goldsborough
answered me. I answered him. He replied. I replied.
We _BOTH_ got emails from the moderator at the same time, asking us not to
reply to each other's posts, -- in fact, not even to REFER to each other, as I
recall -- to let it drop. I did that. Reid Goldsborough continued to attack me
in posts to other people. I complained to the moderator and then I delisted
from Moneta-L.
I replied to his attacks on my "Alexander" works via the Numisma-L list and he
responded to that on Numisma-L. Therefore it is not true that I have never
answered him on his questions about Macedonian coins with images of Herakles
struck before the ascension of Alexander.
From: "Michael E. Marotta" <Panormoiwn@A...>
Date: Fri May 2, 2003 7:07 am
Subject: Alexander as Herakles
From: Reid Goldsborough <reidgold@C...>
Date: Fri May 2, 2003 9:50 am
Subject: Re: Alexander as Herakles
The maillist archives are publicly available to anyone if anyone really cares
enough to validate who said what to whom about what when. What is not publicly
available is the email from the moderator to Goldsborough and me. However, Reid
Goldsborough cited it in a reply to me telling me that he was not going to
reply.
From: Reid Goldsborough <reidgold@c...>
Date: Tue Apr 29, 2003 11:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Moneta-L] Bulgarian School counterfeits Apollonia Pontika
drachms
there are lots of other things I find objectionable about your
recent spate of posts, specifically a fair number of characteristic factual
errors. But as Kevin has asked the both of us to cool it, I'm going to.
(that was followed two days later by this)
From: Reid Goldsborough <reidgold@c...>
Date: Thu May 1, 2003 10:30 am
Subject: Re: [Moneta-L] Numismatics and Philosophy
At 12:17 PM 4/29/2003 -0400, Panormoiwn@a... wrote:
>Numismatists refuse to recognize Alexander as Herakles, claiming that
>there was no tradition of royal portraiture before Alexander.
That's not why at all. There was no tradition in the *West* to put a royal ...
Per the moderator's request, I had already laid off Reid Goldsborough who
continued talking to someone who was not there.
Michael E. Marotta
Phil DeMayo
>Per the moderator's request, I had already laid off Reid Goldsborough who
>continued talking to someone who was not there.
Isn't that his biggest audience?
Phil DeMayo
>On 15 May 2003 03:41:28 GMT, flip...@aol.compulsion (Phil DeMayo)
>wrote:
>
>>Are you leaving anything out here? Are you sure you both weren't asked to
>drop
>>the matter?
>
>Michael was asked to stop the innuendos and name calling.
Gee Reid....Michael just posted one of your own messages to Moneta-L where you
admit that you were BOTH asked to cool it.
mark
>In your interpretation, a six grader making a photocopy of a photo of
>a bridge from a book and using it to build a model bridge for a school
>project would be guilty of copyright infringement if he didn't get
>permission from the book author.
Not at all, as that would obviously be for educational purposes. Furthermore,
the copyright law has a section on photography and how to apply the derivative
works concept.
>The RCC medal in no way whatsoever presented any possibility of
>causing the author of the book in which the coin photo appeared lost
>profits. The RCC medal wasn't competitive with the book.
Again, you have the wrong context. The original discussion was on a written
work.
And again, you are tying profits to infringement. I've already posted
references to a court case that clearly stated profits don't have to come into
play at all for infringement to have occured.
>But I'm not going to rehash this further, and least of all not with
>you.
Good, because you keep getting it wrong.
--
mark
Alan & Erin Williams
>
> Reid Goldsborough wrote:
>
> >On 15 May 2003 03:41:28 GMT, flip...@aol.compulsion (Phil DeMayo)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Are you leaving anything out here? Are you sure you both weren't asked to
> >drop
> >>the matter?
> >
> >Michael was asked to stop the innuendos and name calling.
>
> Gee Reid....Michael just posted one of your own messages to Moneta-L where you
> admit that you were BOTH asked to cool it.
>
Alan
'goose sauce'
so ne
<<In your interpretation, a six grader making a photocopy of a photo of
a bridge from a book and using it to build a model bridge for a school
project would be guilty of copyright infringement if he didn't get
permission from the book author.>>
educational <<<<<<<<purposes. Furthermore, the <<<<<<<<copyright law has
a section on <<<<<<<<photography and how to apply <<<<<<<<the derivative
works concept.
causing the author of the book in which the coin photo appeared lost
profits. The RCC medal wasn't competitive with the book>>.
on a written work.
And again, you are tying profits to infringement. I've already posted
references to a court case that clearly stated profits don't have to
come into play at all for infringement to have occured.
all not with you. >>
Mark<<<Good, because you keep getting it wrong.
--
mark>>>>
As far as school work, correct me Chrysta if I am wrong please.
We were told to use ANY source, but, we needed to footnote our source.
Not just name of but edition, date of publ, vol# if there was one,
publisher, page and anything else thatt was available to direct someone
else to the EXACT source.
Doris
"B+" never higher
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a cash advance.