Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook


The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.


Expert Grader
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1949threepence last won the day on July 17

1949threepence had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,372 Excellent

1 Follower

About 1949threepence

  • Rank
    Otherwise known as Mike
  • Birthday 06/16/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Wine, women, coins, heritage railways and old black and white British films from the 1940's and 50's.

Recent Profile Visitors

21,432 profile views
  1. 1949threepence


    Oh well you know the drill by now. Filling in the wasted time. Hopefully you'll be able to extract yourself from the situation.
  2. 1949threepence


    Just been texting a mate of mine, and he tells me you can use "chinkie", as in ordering a Chinese meal, as he did so just a couple of weeks ago with no problem - yet that has a more obvious racist overtone (even though not meant that way) than "chink", which is a real dictionary word, as in "chink of light", or my example above. They really haven't put a lot of intelligent thought into this. What about Taffy, Jock or Paddy? (two of them are actual first names). Or are there gradations of racial offensiveness with some counting and some not, but none of us actually knowing which. How do they manage with other languages? Presumably they have national moderators or algorithms/bots (whatever they're called). .
  3. 1949threepence

    More handcock LOL

    What's the betting that in a year or so's time he'll be invited back into the ministerial fold? You'll wake up one morning and the news will be "following the resignation of xxxxx, the new minister for xxxxxxxx is Matt Hancock. Mr Hancock resigned as Health Minister in 2021 following controversy over not following social distancing rules".
  4. 1949threepence


    My immediate thought was to give you a laughing emoji, but actually, you're probably right. That wouldn't surprise me at all.
  5. 1949threepence


    Thanks Chris - I kind of thought that might be the case, and you've kindly confirmed it for me. These bans, for genuine posts, inhibit the free flow of conversation.
  6. 1949threepence


    Quite apart from the lack of intelligent discernment, the other problem is that as posters we don't really know what's allowable and what's not - there's no handbook of specifics. Just a long winded set of somewhat rambling, very generically written rules. Also, it's virtually impossible to get in touch with facebook and dispute their decision. Not worth it for me anyway, as I'll be out of the ban in 2 days.
  7. 1949threepence


    Thanks Gents. I did have second thoughts about posting this thread, hence why I deleted it immediately after posting. But on further reflection, we can possibly all learn from my experience, especially facebook users. I'm a member of a political discussion forum on facebook and yesterday we were discussing the government's intention to introduce vaccine passports for night club users from September, and it was mentioned that although Labour normally support the government on covid measures, this time they are against it. Given that a sizeable Tory backbench rebellion also seems likely, the government may be defeated on this issue. I merely said in response to another poster that Starmer may have found a chink in the armour of the government - a commonly used phrase you might think, and certainly employed by me in complete innocence and good faith. But it's landed me with a 3 day ban from facebook for hate speech. At first I wondered what they were on about, but then realised it was the use of the word "chink", which they obviously included in their "algorithm" as a racially abusive term against Chinese people - even though it obviously has an older dictionary meaning. So the moral is to be ultra careful when posting on facebook and don't use phrases/words which their algorithm can misinterpret. This shows up the limits of robotised moderation. I've redacted bits of this screenshot for anonymity of me, the group and the poster I was replying to.
  8. 1949threepence

    Elvis - London Mint Office

    You do anything but lay off of my blue suede shoes
  9. 1949threepence

    More Pennies

    He's 'avin a larf. Better in the hand indeed.
  10. 1949threepence

    1852 Florin Query

    Ah, generic definition of the term, not individual explanation in the customer's personal account. Not enough in my view. Personally I'd rather pay a few more quid for the couple of minutes it would take the examiner to write a quick explanation, as it pertains to the generic term employed for the individual coin.
  11. 1949threepence

    1852 Florin Query

    Oh, right. So there's some great advice for @Paulus who was also presumably in the dark. That's obviously an extremely relevant point of which some of us were completely unaware until you just mentioned it. Have you just found that out, Pete? All we need now is for the company to helpfully point that out when they return the coin, and all's good.
  12. 1949threepence

    1852 Florin Query

    Surely it requires an element of commonsense. If you take, for example, "verdigris" as a reason for rejection - if the verd is obvious and easily visible to the naked eye, then yes, the single word "verdigris" is adequate. But if it's one (or even a few) tiny specks, only visible under high magnification, then it's surely reasonable to expect a pointer as to where it, or even just one of the specks, is. Same with "altered". If tooling is obvious and widespread, fair enough, "altered" covers it. But if it's not obvious, then a few further words of explanation are helpful. Otherwise the customer's understandable reaction is going to be "where, what?".
  13. 1949threepence

    1852 Florin Query

    Absolutely. I can't see why customers should have to be involved in an unnecessary guessing game, when all it takes is the briefest of explanations to explain the precise reason for rejection. Essentially we're all still guessing now, and the one word given by the TPG was the entire reason for the OP's thread starter.
  14. 1949threepence

    1852 Florin Query

    I totally agree. No idea what the "small print" ahead of slabbing says, but surely it would be better to just return the coin unslabbed, with more than a one word explanation. Not saying you need an essay, but instead of "altered" for example, how about "we noticed scratches on the Queen's neck which we interpret to be deliberately placed post mint", or some such? Just to point the sender in the direction of precisely why the rejection occurred. Simply saying "altered" is insufficient information.