FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board
Resources => 
The Best of Type Gallery => Topic started by: Joe Sermarini on May 21, 2011, 08:22:34 am
-
I would like to generate a bit more interest and activity in the best of type gallery. The coin of the day thread is popular and my original idea for the best of type gallery was to create that sort of sharing and fun. I would like to spice it up a bit. Some ideas:
Add a best of type discussion board instead of the single generic Members' Gallery board.
A monthly review which deletes any coin with a rating below 4.1 with more than 10 votes and any coin which is the same type as another with a lower score.
Encouraging people to post challenges (my coin is better) and advertise them on the discussion board.
Anyone like the ideas? Other ideas?
-
I think that's a great idea. It's what I thought that gallery should be when reading the description. Who would do the editing and deleting of the ones that get bumped?
I think it may need sub galleries within the gallery because each page has different era of coins on it and makes it hard to find the coin you want to beat! So perhaps "Republican" "1st Century" "Adoptive"...
I also wish you could place the same coin file picture into multiple galleries and keep the comments and ratings.
-
I wish you could place the same coin file picture into multiple galleries and keep the comments and ratings.
I agree. That and deleting a picture to upload a new one without deleting the entire file, etc. That way you could update your pictures.
There is also a bug sometimes. When you post in a gallery they don't show up right, etc. Right now I posted a coin in the portrait gallery, and it shows up there and in my gallery a second time. Haven't decided how to remove it yet.
-
The Forum staff would do the monthly review (probably me).
I think sub-galleries would be too complex but will think about it. Coins are in order by title, it isn't really that hard to find them.
I also, wish it was possible and easy to put coins in multiple galleries with shared comments and rating. I also wish it was possible for users to replace pics. Unfortunately, the gallery software is off-the-shelf and has limited features. We just use it. It isn't all I would like it to be but overall, it works well. There are some updates that may fix or improve things. We will be implementing those in the next few months.
-
I like the idea Joe, but the rating system is tough. I have a couple hundred coins in my gallery, including a few that are not only very good looking and rarish, but the only coins of the type here and I don't have a single coin with a posted rating. Maybe my coins suck and don't deserve rating, but I also know that I have looked at hundreds of other peoples coins and have never given them a rating either. *edit - I know that some people do post ratings, but on the whole I think it would be tough to get everyone browsing the gallery to give a rating.
I have the semblance of an idea though. I see somthing like the website award committee being set up and people submitting gallery links to either their own coin or another members coins. The committee then divys up the submissions (weekly, monthly, ongoing?), searches for similar coins (in the FORVM gallery, not on wildwinds or similar), and if in fact the coin submitted is "BoT" then it is included in the gallery. If not, the coin found that is better is submitted in it's place.
That is my rough idea. Not only will it fill the BoT gallery, it would also be accurate. As a side benefit, the committee would gain more familiarity with various coin types. This could also be extended to the portrait gallery, etc. as a sub set.
Chris
-
Please, not another committee! I think having a thread and voting for one of a number of user-submitted coins would create some competition. There'd have to be a definition of type, e.g. I think all camp gates, no matter the ruler, legends etc. are one type, I know some people think an extra star or dot or an open door makes it a different type.
I could easily add 50 coins to BOT, because they'd be the only ones in there and 'best', no matter their condition, so this would only create competition for the most common types.
-
I'm not talking about members voting. I am not talking about visible submissions either. I was thinking more of a pm or email to the committee behind the scene. Web sites can be subjective and require member votes, but a torn up Arles campgate vs a clean easily read campgate of the same type would be pretty easy to identify. This could/would be a monstorous undertaking, but when finished, could/would rival wildwinds (sorry Dane) or acsearch (sorry Lars). We have all said in the past (especially when wildwinds is down) that it would be great to use the forvm gallery to it's fullest, we now have the chance. These coins could be fully documented/attributed and properly posted in a similar format. One more step closer to FORVM being a one stop shop.
Or my idea could be too grand.
Chris
-
...but when finished, could/would rival wildwinds (sorry Dane) or acsearch (sorry Lars)...
It has always been my intent that the Members' Gallery should become a great attribution resource. I am a firm believer in wiki (not some kind of witchcraft, wiki, like wikipedia :) ). The disorganized contributions of the many will eventually have a result better than the organized contributions of the few. I sometimes use Google to search for a type and sometimes a Members' Gallery entry pops up and has far better info than any other site. There is no finished and it slowly but certainly gets better everyday. I don't think we need a formal organization or even big changes.
-
If you're going to do it at all, do it by voting, not some monstrous intransparent comittee. Make a thread, have people submit their own coins of a certain, defined type if they think they stand a chance and let people vote. I don't think too many peple would submit crappy coins that will never win anyway. I doubt there'd be more people voting than for the web site awards though but maybe there would be, because there'd be actual competition.
-
We actually had a few Best of Type votes back when the gallery first started, but we have forgotten about it and lost momentum.
...There'd have to be a definition of type, e.g. I think all camp gates, no matter the ruler, legends etc. are one type, I know some people think an extra star or dot or an open door makes it a different type.
We already have a rule for the definition. If you describe your coin as a Constantine campgate, it will be deleted unless it is the best Constantine campgate. If you describe it as Constantine campgate, RIC 512, it will be deleted unless it is the best Constantine campgate, RIC 512. My "secret" purpose for this rule to encourage more complete attributions.
I could easily add 50 coins to BOT, because they'd be the only ones in there and 'best', no matter their condition, so this would only create competition for the most common types.
Go ahead and do it! The purpose of the minimum rating is, however to get rid of some the not so nice coins. The Best of Type Gallery should be filled mostly with only impressive coins. Hopefully, people are smart enough (I think they are) to consider rarity when they rate coins.
I don't think there is anything terribly wrong with how the Best of Type gallery is working now, I just hope to make it more active and fun.
-
There were a few people who went through the BoT section giving out 0 star ratings, seemingly out of malice. This could be seen when after five votes a coin dropped from 5 stars to 4 in a single turn. I am hoping that those days have gone!
Martin
-
I know for myself, that before I post to BOT, I check to make sure there isn't a better example already posted.
One question for Joe
When I sell a coin, should I remove it from BOT? I have done so in the past. I do this to avoid a situation where the coin is posted twice by successive owners. For instance, there is a highly rated Lysi tet that AlexB owned and is now owned by Jochen. The coin is now double posted and both are sitting near the top of the voting (although AlexB is in BOT and Jochen is in a personal gallery.)
However, I have removed a few stellar examples that were not purchased by a Forum member and thus disappear forever from the BOT gallery.
BR
Mark
-
I'm having fun!
Here's two:
Probus
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-67424
(https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/18312/normal_Probus_Sol_Invicto~0.jpg)
Galerius:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-67425
(https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/18312/normal_Galerius_sacra_moneta~0.jpg)
-
I am a little confused about the rules of the BoT game. Are we to post them in the BoT gallery and await votes, or move them from our Personal Gallery into the BoT gallery after the coin receives suitable votes and comments/accolades sufficient to warrant a potential BoT categorization? i.e is it about wannabees, or those that have stood the test of scrutiny in a personal gallery?
I am not inclined to deplete my Personal Gallery by moving highly rated coins to the BoT Gallery. So do I then double post them in the BoT gallery and if so how are prior votes and comments received in the Personal Gallery listing recorded in the BoT listing?
-
I think the Best of Type gallery should be wiped and started anew. That would make it easier to judge multiple examples of each type as they are submitted, and also to chat about new additions and if they qualify for the gallery. I have a couple examples in the BoT gallery right now and wouldn't mind re-submitting them, what do others think about this idea?
-
...When I sell a coin, should I remove it from BOT?...
Please, NOOOOOOOOOO.
-
Don't move your coins to Best of Type, make a duplicate completely separate entry.
I am not going to wipe out the BOT gallery and start over. The idea is to grow the gallery, not shrink it.
-
I am not going to wipe out the BOT gallery and start over.
Joe, you pre-empted my reply to mihali84's post. ;D There are far too many beautiful coins in the current BOT gallery which would be irreplaceably lost if the gallery was deleted.
Alex.
-
Ok guys forgive me it was really late when i posted that ;D I agree though, there are a lot of great coins in there and i guess it would be a shame that some would probably not make it back in there.
So where, how, and when should the screening process occur? Should it be up to us to bring up a certain type, show the duplicates of the same type, and judge which stays and goes? or is that up to the moderators to decide??
-
...When I sell a coin, should I remove it from BOT?...
Please, NOOOOOOOOOO.
If ownership is not one of the criteria for posting in the BoT gallery and we are looking for the best of type, why wouldn't someone just post coins from scans of the absolute best of any type to be found in museum files (eg BM online coin database), catalogs, acsearch or other online coin databases, etc?
There are many coins in the BoT gallery that I have noted better examples of in various catalogs and databases, which could be uploaded to the BoT gallery if absolute BoT regardless of ownership/source is the ultimate objective. A few of those already in the gallery may fall into this category.
Is it best of type in a Forvm members collection, or absolute best of type regardless of ownership in which case open slather search of old catalogs and databases would yield the best outcome most efficiently?
Or is it that the coin should simply have passed through the hands of the poster, even for a few seconds, to be posted in the BoT gallery. In which case any intermediary engaged by a clientele of anonymous deep pocketed collectors would be in the best position to populate the gallery.
-
...When I sell a coin, should I remove it from BOT?...
Please, NOOOOOOOOOO.
If ownership is not one of the criteria for posting in the BoT gallery and we are looking for the best of type, why wouldn't someone just post coins from scans of the absolute best of any type to be found in museum files (eg BM online coin database), catalogs, acsearch or other online coin databases, etc?
There are many coins in the BoT gallery that I have noted better examples of in various catalogs and databases, which could be uploaded to the BoT gallery if absolute BoT regardless of ownership/source is the ultimate objective. A few of those already in the gallery may fall into this category.
Is it best of type in a Forvm members collection, or absolute best of type regardless of ownership in which case open slather search of old catalogs and databases would yield the best outcome most efficiently?
Or is it that the coin should simply have passed through the hands of the poster, even for a few seconds, to be posted in the BoT gallery. In which case any intermediary engaged by a clientele of anonymous deep pocketed collectors would be in the best position to populate the gallery.
Ownership of the coin is not a rule. But I don't imagine there is a lot of motivation to post photos of coins from old catalogs or databases. I also don't want people posting photos if someone else might complain they don't have permission to use them.
-
Ok guys forgive me it was really late when i posted that ;D I agree though, there are a lot of great coins in there and i guess it would be a shame that some would probably not make it back in there.
So where, how, and when should the screening process occur? Should it be up to us to bring up a certain type, show the duplicates of the same type, and judge which stays and goes? or is that up to the moderators to decide??
Voting is never ending, just rate the coins.
I encourage make posts that identify duplicates and encourage people to vote (rate the coins).
Periodically I check the ratings. If I see a coin with more than 10 votes and a rating of 4.0 or less, I will delete it. Anytime I see a coin with a challenger, and both have 10 votes or more, I will delete the lower rated coin. If I see that there is an active challenge going on I might wait a few days for more ratings to come in.
-
I would like to generate a bit more interest and activity in the best of type gallery.
As requested I've added a bunch of worthwhile Greek candidates to try and liven things up... plenty for discussion and a few challenges now in place.... just a pity I couldn't bring over the votes and comments from the personal gallery. I'll add a few exotics and oddball BoT's in coming days.
-
As someone said before, there are a bunch of people rating coins down. I have a special friend that rated all of my coins 0 stars until I disabled it. I think he's still going at it in my folder of sold coins. ;D Apart from a few malicious comments in the user gallery that are now deleted (I think by answering one I aquired this special friend) he has never posted anything. Can voting in the galleries be restricted like the sending of Private messages? Or is there another way to filter out the zeros, at least in the BOT gallery?
-
As someone said before, there are a bunch of people rating coins down. I have a special friend that rated all of my coins 0 stars until I disabled it. I think he's still going at it in my folder of sold coins. ;D Apart from a few malicious comments in the user gallery that are now deleted (I think by answering one I aquired this special friend) he has never posted anything. Can voting in the galleries be restricted like the sending of Private messages? Or is there another way to filter out the zeros, at least in the BOT gallery?
Good point. Many coins in the BoT gallery have less than a handful of votes, so that a single zero vote can have a material impact on the rating, sufficient to drop it below Joe's termination threshold. Even with ten votes at 5 a single zero vote drops the average perilously close to the coin getting the axe. I'm waiting for the voting daggers to come out. Bring it on. Its all good fun as long as we don't take it too seriously and Joe exercises the discretion of his eye, rather than relying simply on the scoring averages when it comes to hitting the delete button, which I am sure he will. :evil:
-
Great idea to try to make the best of type gallery more active. I have a few issues with it though.
1. I am looking at some of the coins Lloyd just posted. Let's take his Alexander drachm for example. Looking at that coin, I'd rate it a 5 and I have done so.
The coin is here:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-67481
(https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/16227/Macedonian_Kingdom%2C_Alexander_III_the_Great%2C_AR_Drachm%2C_Sardis_Mint_325-323_BC%2C_Lifetime_issue~0.jpg)
There is another drachm belonging to Philoromaos, that I have already rated as a 5 as well. In my opinion, it deserves that rating. It is here:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-55516
(https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/albums/userpics/21206/normal_Alexander_III_Drachm_EF~0.jpg)
Again, in my opinion, Philoromaos' coin has nicer surfaces thatn Lloyd's but the reverse of Lloyd's is simply a work of art. If I had to choose between the two, I'd choose Lloyd's. I'm sure there are others who would choose Philoromaos's coin. I don't want to downgrade my rating to a 4 just to rate Lloyd's higher, because both coins deserve a 5. (It also leads one to the temptation of giving a beautiful coin a zero just because you like another better).
There is no way to make a distinction between two 5s under the current system. So wouldn't a poll between the two be better and then anyone who wants to challenge the winner has to do so by setting up a poll in a best of type challenge thread?
That has the added advantage of letting us know when a challenge has occurred, so we can vote.
2. Is there a way to search all coins of a type in the best of type thread? For example, how do I find all Athens tets posted in that gallery. When I run a search for Athens tets, it shows me all Athens tets in all galleries.
The question: Is it possible to organizethe best of type gallery into subgalleries so that it's easier to take a look at the best of type in a particular category and decide whether you have a challenger in your trays?
For example:
Best of Type Roman
Best of Type Roman Provincial
Best of Type Greek
Best of Type Byzantine
etc.
Great if there could be subcategories. Not real detailed, but in Greek for example:
Asia Minor
Mainland/Islands
Magna Graecia
You could get more detailed, but I don't think you'd need to.
That way, you know where to look and it's a bit easier to populate the galleries.
I know it's probably a lot of work to split everything up that way, but I'd volunteer to help. I'd be happy to maintain the Best of Type Greek Galleries, for example.
-
I would like to generate a bit more interest and activity in the best of type gallery. The coin of the day thread is popular and my original idea for the best of type gallery was to create that sort of sharing and fun. I would like to spice it up a bit. Some ideas:
Add a best of type discussion board instead of the single generic Members' Gallery board.
A monthly review which deletes any coin with a rating below 4.1 with more than 10 votes and any coin which is the same type as another with a lower score.
Encouraging people to post challenges (my coin is better) and advertise them on the discussion board.
Anyone like the ideas? Other ideas?
Joe
You may want to call this thread "Pandoras Box"........because you have surely opened it. :)
-
Your two 5's may be the same, but others will rate one a four. It is the cumulative rating that counts and I don't think there is a problem with the current 1 through 5 scale.
I renamed all the titles of coins in the BOT gallery yesterday, the default order is by title. You can change your viewing sort order but if you leave the default, two coins of the same type (with identical or similar titles) should be next to eachother or very close in the sort order. You shouldn't have to use search to browse the BOT at all (but you can). For example, if members start titles for Roman Coins with ROMAN, they will fall into the right order. I will periodically re-title entries to keep a logical sort order.
If you want to see all the Athens tets, scroll until you find the coins starting with "GREEK, Athens..." (some may be "GREEK, Attica, Athens...").
I will consider volunteer Admins for BOT. The responsibilities would be:
Periodically editing titles to keep a logical sort order for all the files.
Deleting coins with a rating below 4.1 and over 10 votes.
Posting a challenge notification on the boards (use a new thread) when you notice two coins of the same type, setting an end date for voting (maybe two weeks?).
Setting an end date for the challenge when a member posts their own challenge notification on the boards (again, maybe two weeks?)
Deleting the lower rated coin when enough votes make the results of a challenge clear (posted end date passed and at least 10 votes for each).
Really a simple system. It is meant only to be good fun and to accumulate a beautiful gallery of coins for everyone to enjoy.
-
May I propose that the title for RR ,as it is now, be followed by the Gens.
i.e. ROMAN REPUBLIC, POSTUMIA . The name of the moneyer could follow,or be included in the general description.
-
May I propose that the title for RR ,as it is now, be followed by the Gens.
i.e. ROMAN REPUBLIC, POSTUMIA . The name of the moneyer could follow,or be included in the general description.
I agree, that is the best naming scheme for Roman Republic.
-
Are Celtic Gaul coins allowed in BOT?
Thank you,
bv
-
Don't see why not. They're certainly a type of coin.
-
Are Celtic Gaul coins allowed in BOT?
Thank you,
bv
Why not ?
There are medieval coins in BOT gallery which are not as ancient as Celtic are, and deserving being there.
Potator
-
This board is called "Classical Numismatics Discussion Board", isn't it, and celtics are considered a non-classical culture, hence the question.
Thank you for the kind answer.
b
-
This board is called "Classical Numismatics Discussion Board", isn't it, and celtics are considered a non-classical culture, hence the question.
Thank you for the kind answer.
b
Both the shop and the discussion board have expanded into other areas since inception. Despite the name, we have always been somewhat flexible. Anything ancient, medieval or even just numismatic is OK. Just don't put up any pics of your girlfriend in BOT. :)
-
Just don't put up any pics of your girlfriend in BOT. :)
You sure about that? Because THAT would stimulate alot of interest in BOT.. :evil:
Mark
-
I've been hesitant to add anything to BoT, suppose I'll give it a try now :)
-
A couple of questions that causes me to ask about the validity and basis of of BoT voting:
If people are not familiar with the range of specific grades of a coin type posted in the BoT gallery how do they judge the merits of the posted coin?
Do they simply vote on coin aesthetics, which has no bearing on whether the example is actually a best of the type?
Best of type determination requires familiarity with all the possible range of specimens of a specific type.
For example, I posted a pig ugly coin, which at first blush would get a 1/5 for aesthetic appeal. Yet as I said in the posting after many years of studying the type it is the best example I have come across and anyone familiar with the standard reference on the type Retowski Die Munzen Der Komnenen Von Trapezunt would I dare say agree.
Like many others coins in the BoT gallery it received a 1/5 without any comment as to why.
On aesthetic grounds I can appreciate why it scored this vote. But aesthetics are irrelevant to the issue of whether this is the best example of a Trebizond Basil emission, specifically Retwoski 9.
Did the person who voted on this know anything of the coinage of Trebizond and the form of surviving examples? I very much doubt it. Had he read Retwoski, which at a minimum would be the basic requirement for making a judgement? I doubt it.
If people are going to post crappy low votes, then it would be appreciated, in fact it should be a requirement that they explain why.
Otherwise the voting process is completely flawed.
My suggestion: Low votes need to be qualified with explanation otherwise they should be deleted from the count.
Otherwise, it appears that the numismatic equivalent of penis envy runs large amongst some Forvmites and it will defeat the purpose of Joe in having a BOT gallery.
-
...Otherwise the voting process is completely flawed...
...My suggestion: Low votes need to be qualified with explanation otherwise they should be deleted from the count...
It is flawed but it isn't completely flawed. We may lose a few coin to deletion that actually are BOT. The primary intent, however, is to have fun and build a gallery of very attractive coins. The process is good enough for that.
Your suggestion sounds good but is impossible to implement. Voting is anonymous and the no way to tie it to comments.
-
Your suggestion sounds good but is impossible to implement. Voting is anonymous and the no way to tie it to comments.
I suggest that anything below a 2/5 be discounted for the purposes of the calculation of average score, unless accompanied by a comment that explains why it was rated 0 or 1. After all no-one is posting slugs on the BoT Gallery and if they did I'd be happy to rate it low and explain that because it is a slug it gets a zero. Similarly, when posting what at first glance appear would appear to be average coins to those not initiated with the type, the poster should provide some qualification as to why it warrants consideration as a best of type.
-
..... We may lose a few coin to deletion that actually are BOT.
Surely common-sense will prevent the unwarranted deletion of BOT coins simply because of their vote count.
Would anyone delete the coin below if it only managed to to be awarded a three? I say this because, in the early BOT days, because of malevolent members, that was all it achieved. It has taken several years and 147 votes for it to reach 4.7. This coin is in my view one of the finest coins in existence and yet, simply because of malevolent voting this coin can never rate a 5 in the BOT gallery.
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-4349
Alex.
-
Would anyone delete the coin below if it only managed to to be awarded a three? I say this because, in the early BOT days, because of malevolent members, that was all it achieved. It has taken several years and 147 votes for it to reach 4.7. This coin is in my view one of the finest coins in existence and yet, simply because of malevolent voting this coin can never rate a 5 in the BOT gallery.
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-4349
That is a truly sad indictment of the extremely small minority of humorless, ignorant, morons that stalk this hallowed FORVM.
-
I just posted a couple of my favorites in an attempt to boost the Greek side of things. Not quite the same level as Lloyds beauties, but one is one of the only two known of that type (to the best of my knowledge), so we'll how the voting goes and if Lloyd's theory holds.
-
If it is only one of two known, I would suggest including that in the title (at the end) for our voters that don't like to read the details.
-
I wouldn't call it humourless, this is what you find funny when you're 12-14.
The more people are annoyed by it, the more it will happen.
-
I don't think that every coin in the BOT, just because it is in the BOT and is therefore going to be a very fine example of a type should get the 4-5 rating.
If you post a coin worthy of the BOT in your gallery, well then sure it should be a 4-5 without question. However, when you post a coin in the BOT, the catagory name itself should imply a much harsher and stricter grading by members. A coin that gets a 5 in your gallery may only get a 3 in the BOT.
And yes, with reason a coin in the BOT can and should in some instances get a 1-3 rating. It is the elite of the elite and therefore has to be critiqued strongly and in a fashion that can sort those that are even better than itself.
I hope this rambling post makes sense. I will say that I have given one or two coins a 2 or 3 because I was comparing them to the others of the type posted in the BOT. When I put 4 coins or so alonside one another, my favorite got a 5, and my grading went down from there appropriately.
Just my opinion for what it is worth.
-
Everyone has their own opinions on voting, and that is OK. I don't rate any stricter because a coin is in BOT. I am unlikely to give anyone a 1 or 2, just because I think it isn't a very nice thing to do. In fact, the only time I will is if I think a better coin might lose a challenge.
-
At the extreme, I'm not sure how the below coin would fare:
I guess this example, my (ex) EID MAR, would qualify as a "Worst of Type".
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2510/4011612774_8fc23e1803_m.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ahala_rome/4011612774/)
This is an intriguing niche: where there are countable specimens of a given rare type one could nominate a "worst of type" and one could even aim to assemble a collection containing nothing but "worst of types"!
-
Everyone has their own opinions on voting, and that is OK. I don't rate any stricter because a coin is in BOT. I am unlikely to give anyone a 1 or 2, just because I think it isn't a very nice thing to do. In fact, the only time I will is if I think a better coin might lose a challenge.
Good point as well. I am still figuring out how I want to vote and grade in the BOT, I did a few that way and have also thought along the lines you have just mentioned.
I find it hard that if every coin gets a 4 or 5 that one should be removed when it may be a 4.9 and the other a 5.0.
It also somewhat defeats the purpose of the 1-3 ratings, and could easily warrant the removal of them as already pointed out as an idea.
I think the varied voting styles of voting though should act as checks and balances to one another in the long run making for an accurate reflection of the forvm community opinions of a coin.
-
I had this as a new topic but deleted it and put it here as more appropriate:
I have been going through the BOT giving my ratings and have noticed a few coins that should have challenges on them. A couple new style tetradrachms, and such.
Without putting the weight of this on the moderator, Dino, how should the challenges be issued? I know there has been discussion, but with things seeming to be kicking off is there a decision?
It would be nice to see a single active member try to keep up with it if possible, much like Chris does the Never Ending Cleaning Competition, with posts of challenges and end dates to get your votes and comments in, and then of course deletions.
As a side note, when a coin loses, I think the owner should have the opportunity to just transfer their coin to their personal gallery instead of losing all the informatio and comments. The moderator or person in charge of the competitions could leave a comment stating that it was a BOT contestant, etc. until such and such date against such and such coin with a link. The winner could get a comment stating that they won a challenge on such and such date against such and such coin(s) with a link as well. Then a coin that sticks around would show all the round winnings.
Also, it would be nice to see the challenges with the exclamation point message icon so one can easily see what challenges are open at the time.
Any others like this idea?
-
We can transfer to the member's gallery rather than delete but we have suggested making duplicate postings. Your best coins shouldn't be missing from your personal gallery just because they are in BOT. And there is no harm in two listings for the same coin.
BOT challenges exist even if no one points them out in a post here on the discussion board. Anyone can post the challenges. Dino has volunteered as a moderator. He will probably post some of them. Others may volunteer too.
I like the exclamation point message icon idea.
-
We can transfer to the member's gallery rather than delete but we have suggested making duplicate postings. Your best coins shouldn't be missing from your personal gallery just because they are in BOT. And there is no harm in two listings for the same coin.
BOT challenges exist even if no one points them out in a post here on the discussion board. Anyone can post the challenges. Dino has volunteered as a moderator. He will probably post some of them. Others may volunteer too.
I like the exclamation point message icon idea.
I agree with double posting in both as well. But someones coin may get more views and a lot of comments from being in the BOT, and they may wish to delete the one in their gallery at some point as the BOT one, even though it lost, may be more "prestigious" in his/her gallery. That was my thought of moving it to the gallery and then letting the owner decide if they want it twice in his/her gallery or to keep one or the other.
-
I agree with double posting in both as well. But someones coin may get more views and a lot of comments from being in the BOT, and they may wish to delete the one in their gallery at some point as the BOT one, even though it lost, may be more "prestigious" in his/her gallery. That was my thought of moving it to the gallery and then letting the owner decide if they want it twice in his/her gallery or to keep one or the other.
As I wrote in another thread this morning :
There is a possibility : open the file you want to move from the BOT gallery to say "benito's imperials", click "edit file informations" open the "album" list and choose the one in which you would like your file to go (you will see there the theme galleries and your own galleries, not other's of course). Then click on "apply modifications" at the bottom of your screen.
About the starting of a challenge, my guess is anyone can do that : I did when I realized the coin I wanted to add to the BOT gallery had already two specimens of the same RIC reference.
Hope it's appropriate... ::)
Potator
-
I agree with double posting in both as well. But someones coin may get more views and a lot of comments from being in the BOT, and they may wish to delete the one in their gallery at some point as the BOT one, even though it lost, may be more "prestigious" in his/her gallery. That was my thought of moving it to the gallery and then letting the owner decide if they want it twice in his/her gallery or to keep one or the other.
As I wrote in another thread this morning :
There is a possibility : open the file you want to move from the BOT gallery to say "benito's imperials", click "edit file informations" open the "album" list and choose the one in which you would like your file to go (you will see there the theme galleries and your own galleries, not other's of course). Then click on "apply modifications" at the bottom of your screen.
Potator
That doesn't help the situation if they delete it after you lose a challenge. Of course you can move it at any time, but it won't be in both galleries and you wouldn't want to move a coin that hasn't lost a challege. It will just move it from the BOT to yours. My suggestion was that whoever moderates the challenge, especially if someone doesn't realize their coin lost, moves the coin to the member gallery and then the member can do as they please from there.
If I lose a challenge and my coin gets deleted before I can move it, then you lose the information. That was the spirit of the suggestion.
-
OK I've now got the point, thanks
-
OK, I will move rather than delete.
-
This is an intriguing niche: where there are countable specimens of a given rare type one could nominate a "worst of type" and one could even aim to assemble a collection containing nothing but "worst of types"!
I've already started on the not so rare types :)
On a serious note, this topic has brought my attention to some fantastic coins that I am grateful to have now seen (in pictures, at least). I hope this keeps going.
-
Since this thread has gone for a couple days without posts, may I ask for a summary post giving the rules all in one place. As I understand it, the intent is to accumulate pictures of pretty coins so types where the best known is a Fine would be unwelcome (let alone Andrew's unique Republicans and most of the coins I would have that could be Best of their type). I fail to understand how a newly posted coin can be rated better when the existing leader has to get mostly 5's or it would be in danger of being removed even though no one posted better. Perhaps a summary would make it clear but after reading three pages of posts I am not at all clear as to the concept let alone the details (like what difference constitutes a separate type or why all posts would not be copied from acsearch and similar archives).
-
In my opinion, posting coins you don't own defeats the purpose. Not that I think I will take part but it's about competition and you can almost always find a nicer one in archives of major auctions.
-
...the intent is to accumulate pictures of pretty coins so types where the best known is a Fine would be unwelcome (let alone Andrew's unique Republicans and most of the coins I would have that could be Best of their type).
Here is another example, if I have a rarity, which with little doubt is the Best of Type as all other examples are in a museum collection, but because of its quality if I were to post it in the BoT gallery it would get the inevitable rush of zeros and ones from the "cogniscenti". Yet the latter probably could not find a better example outside a museum if they made any effort to research the emission.
A beauty competition as embodied in the current voting approach is a different thing to the Best of the Type.
-
A beauty competition as embodied in the current voting approach is a different thing to the Best of the Type.
Exactly. I was interested when I thought the project was Best of Type because I thought it could bring out some nicer examples of really rare coins. Given time, the Beauty contest format should end in a bunch of ties with 5.0 coins unless there is a provision to compare two coins with better/worse rather than 5/4.
I agree each of my coins is a 0/1 so posting is worthless to the project but I'd still like to see someone post a 2/3 let alone a 5:
Embedded in each ugly BOT candidate is the hope that someday someone will dig up a decent one but meanwhile some of us remain happy to have our 'ghosts' and are proud of their status as better than nothing.
The top coin is from the Alexandria mint
The second coin's reverse depicts 4 steps (5 is common) Banti 12
-
... I was interested when I thought the project was Best of Type because I thought it could bring out some nicer examples of really rare coins. .....
I agree each of my coins is a 0/1 so posting is worthless to the project but I'd still like to see someone post a 2/3 let alone a 5:
Embedded in each ugly BOT candidate is the hope that someday someone will dig up a decent one but meanwhile some of us remain happy to have our 'ghosts' and are proud of their status as better than nothing.
You could/should post them with a challenge as I did with one of mine.
The challenge I posted:
Pig ugly by any aesthetic and numismatic grade definition, but this is the best I have encountered of a rare type (John II Retowski 68). I can only locate one other specimen, not quite as fine as this, that has come to market in the last decade. So go to it, put-up, or shut-up, and find a better example of John II Retowski 68 for the BoT gallery.
Seems to have caused people to pause and think before they hit the one star button.
When posting an obviously rough candidate in the BoT gallery I think is serves all well to explain why it is posted and thus warrants consideration as BoT. Then all grades of coins can co-exist in the BoT and the hope of finding a better example of a rough rarity might be fulfilled. Of course this approach may offend those who seek a gallery full of eye-candy and little else.
It is really a question of form versus substance in the BoT gallery. Presently we are swamped by form (looks) but relatively little substance when it comes to rarities. Maybe its time for a separate Best of Rare Type gallery to separate the commonly available and collected well preserved types (the eye candy) from the often rough as guts and ugly rarities that are really only pursued in more serious or highly focused numismatic study.
-
...Of course this approach may offend those who seek a gallery full of eye-candy and little else...
It is really a question of form versus substance in the BoT gallery. Presently we are swamped by form (looks) but relatively little substance when it comes to rarities. Maybe its time for a separate Best of Rare Type gallery to separate the commonly available and collected well preserved types (the eye candy) from the often rough as guts and ugly rarities that are really only pursued in more serious or highly focused numismatic study.
I really doubt anyone is going to be offended by any posting onto BOT. Have a little faith more in your fellow members. Most collectors have a great appreciation for rarity. I expect that if a very rare coin is clearly identified as such (especially in the title), voting will reflect the rarity.
-
If I were to post it it would get the inevitable rush of zeros and ones from the "cogniscenti". Yet the latter probably could not find a better example outside a museum if they made any effort to research the emission.
A beauty competition as embodied in the current voting approach is a different thing to the Best of the Type.
Personally, I don't vote on anything that is outside my area of comfort (unless it is an obviously choice coin). You are correct, a coin can be in terrible condition but still be a BOT based on rarity. I don't want to penalize anyone because of my ignorance.
Fortunately these rankings don't lead to a trophy or cash award.................because then people might take this all too seriously. ::)
BR
Mark
-
What got me was when someone gave my beautiful little Pan a "2" right off the bat. It will take a lot of 5's to over come that. It is a beautiful little coin that was the best (IMO) of small hoard that was offered for sale. Fortunately, no else has voted on it, so I guess it is safe for now. On the other hand, my ruby red Zeus Ammon is doing quite well in the voting.
-
The Bithynians come marching in:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-68136
Now Nikomedes III, in whose reign this coin was struck, is perhaps best known as the father of Julius Caesar's great love, Nikomedes IV.
In 80 BC, a young Gaius Julius Caesar was sent on a mission to Nicomedes IV's court to secure the assistance of the King’s fleet. However, he dallied so long with the King that a rumor of a homosexual relationship surfaced, leading to the disparaging title, "the Queen of Bithynia", an allegation which was made much of by Caesar's political enemies later in his life.
According to Suetonius XLIX:
There was no stain on his reputation for chastity except his intimacy with King Nicomedes, but that was a deep and lasting reproach, which laid him open to insults from every quarter. I say nothing of the notorious lines of Licinius Calvus:
Whate'er Bithynia had, and Caesar's paramour.
Bithynia quicquid/ et pedicator Caesaris umquam habuit.
I pass over, too, the invectives of Dolabella and the elder Curio, in which Dolabella calls him "the queen's rival, the inner partner of the royal couch," and Curio, "the brothel of Nicomedes and the stew of Bithynia'' I take no account of the edicts of Bibulus, in which he posted his colleague as "the queen of Bithyllia," saying that " of yore he was enamoured of a king, but now of a king's estate." At this same time, so Marcus Brutus declares, one Octavius, a man whose disordered mind made him sornewhat free with his tongue, after saluting Pompey as " king " in a crowded assembly, greeted Caesar as ''Queen.'' But Gaius Memmius makes the direct charge that he acted as cup-bearer to Nicomedes with the rest of his wantons at a large dinner-party, and that among the guests were some merchants from Rome, whose names Memmius gives. Cicero, indeed, is not content with having written in sundry letters that Caesar was led by the king's attendants to the royal apartments, that he lay on a golden couch arrayed in purple, and that the virginity of this son of Venus was lost in Bithynia; but when Caesar was once addressing the senate in defence of Nysa, daughter of Nicomedes, and was enumerating his obligations to the king, Cicero cried: " No more of that, pray, for it is well known what he gave you, and what you gave him in turn." Finally, in his Gallic triumph his soldiers, among the bantering songs which are usually sung by those who follow the chariot, shouted these lines, which became a byword
All the Gauls did Caesar vanquish, Nicomedes vanquished him;
Lo! now Caesar rides in triumph, victor over all the Gauls,
Nicomedes does not triumph, who subdued the conqueror.
I have never been able to understand why those who pursue the grandeur that was Rome, favor coins of that secondary love of Julius Caesar's life, Cleopatra VII, over those of his first great love, the Bithynian Nikomedes IV. :evil:
-
Interesting to make a comparison to the BoT postings....
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=toprated
-
Interesting to make a comparison to the BoT postings....
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=toprated
my computer at home is still crashed, so i'm using the work computer at the moment so i only have a minute, but does the comparison above only include coins with at least 10 votes? because i know of coins in the BoT Gallery which are not on this list.
~ Peter
-
Top Rated, as far as I can tell, is simply the highest rated coins across all galleries including the BoT. So many BoT coins will not appear unless they have votes comparable to, or better than, those rated highest in personal galleries. Raises then question as to why aren't the Top Rated from personal galleries automatically considered the best of Type from members collections in the absence of a higher rated type in the BoT gallery? I'd guess that opinions and voting criteria vary from one gallery to the next. Perhaps one person's five star vote in a personal gallery is same person's two stars vote in the BoT?
I should add that the link derives from hitting the Top Rated button in the Gallery page. If you open a specific gallery then hit the Top Rated Button the results will only be applicable to that Specific Gallery. So to see the top rated in the BoT Gallery open that gallery then hit the Top Rated button.
Here for example is the Top Rated in the BoT Gallery only : https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=toprated&cat=-111
The minimum number of votes recorded for a coin on this list is currently 16. The highest number of votes cast is currently 151. It appears that a coin has to get at least fifteen votes cast to make the cut for consideration in the ToP Rated list across all Galleries or the same in the BoT gallery, but different coins make each list based on the average vote that results. In other words the Top Rated list considers both the number of votes cast and the average vote. For example, it is not simply the highest average vote on a vote of one that makes the cut otherwise the list would be dominated by all those coins with a single vote of 5 stars.
Thus Top rated also means those that have attracted the most interest, as measured by the number of votes cast as well as the highest average vote.
-
Raises then question as to why aren't the Top Rated from personal galleries automatically considered the best of Type from members collections in the absence of a higher rated type in the BoT gallery?
Top rated is an off-the-shelf feature of the gallery software. It has nothing in particular to do with the BOT gallery. Top rated from the personal galleries are not in the BOT gallery, so they are not part of the BOT.
-
Also, the top rated coins only appear after 15 people have cast their vote.
-
Just a thought... what if the Best of Type Gallery was divided into two sections (folders), GREEK and ROMAN?
I know the new way of labeling makes it easy to search for only GREEK or ROMAN coins, but i was thinking that it would be more organized if it were divided into two folders.
It would be nice to just click on the Greek folder and see all of the new Greek additions, no offense to the Romans.
-
I just posted my first, and what will probably be my only, coin into the BOT Gallery. I re-photographed my Minucia-19 and posted it. I’m not very confident that it is BOT, but I thought I would join in the fun.
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-68506
Be gentle ;)
-
Just a thought... what if the Best of Type Gallery was divided into two sections (folders), GREEK and ROMAN?
I know the new way of labeling makes it easy to search for only GREEK or ROMAN coins, but i was thinking that it would be more organized if it were divided into two folders.
It would be nice to just click on the Greek folder and see all of the new Greek additions, no offense to the Romans.
I agree with Mike. The BOT Gallery would be much easier to navigate through if there were ‘subdirectories’. Roman & Greek would be a useful start, but without getting overly complicated perhaps further subcategory under each subdivision. For an example; under Roman, Republican and Imperial would be useful.
I know the counterargument; we can get so refined as to become tedious, but I’m not suggesting this minutia, just basic ‘utilitarian’ categories.
-
Great idea to try to make the best of type gallery more active. I have a few issues with it though.
1. I am looking at some of the coins Lloyd just posted. Let's take his Alexander drachm for example. Looking at that coin, I'd rate it a 5 and I have done so.
The coin is here:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-67481
............................
Dino - Returning the compliment on this one. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-50631
I just picked up a copy of the recently released CNG's publication by Oliver D. Hoover HGC 5 Handbook of Coins of the Peloponnesos. Turned to page 179 and there is your Hermione AE
Congratulations on the plate coin HGC 5, 751. I haven't checked the others, but you might like to purchase the book ($65 from CNG) to check on your other coins, plus its a fantastic reference for the serious Greek collector.
Thought you might like to know of the fame of your Hermione. Very cool! 8)
-
So how specific will the Best of Type be? Is the type based on city or officina mint? In other words, say two coins from the same city are submitted but from different officina, are the coins in cometition with each other?
-
If they have the same reference, they are in competition.
-
I had an idea. Like Gladiators who would have a win and loss count could we do the same for the winners? In other words each time a coin goes head to head with another and wins it could get a point or a stat like 2/2 wins. Possible?
-
There isn't any automated way to track wins and losses, and I don't think manual would be easy, so not possible.
-
It seems the idea to promote the BOT is a success. I hope everyone is having fun. :) I can't keep up with all the coins added or the BOT challenges. We are lucky *Alex and Dino volunteered to help. THANKS!.
-
I would like to generate a bit more interest and activity in the best of type gallery. The coin of the day thread is popular and my original idea for the best of type gallery was to create that sort of sharing and fun. I would like to spice it up a bit. Some ideas:
Add a best of type discussion board instead of the single generic Members' Gallery board.
A monthly review which deletes any coin with a rating below 4.1 with more than 10 votes and any coin which is the same type as another with a lower score.
Encouraging people to post challenges (my coin is better) and advertise them on the discussion board.
Anyone like the ideas? Other ideas?
Nice idea to have the competition but since 90% of the coins are Romans it might be nice to have BOT for Roman and another for 'Greek and Other'. The Greek coins kind of get lost in the BOT gallery among all those Romans. One other suggestion is to limit the amount of text accompanying a coin illustration - some of the entries are the length of reference books :) A link to 'more info' might be better - after all we want to look at all the pretty pictures here more than anything else ...
I agree that having too many sub-galleries in BOT might be overkill (Roman alone could have RR, LRB, etc.) but a simple BOT-Greek and BOT-Roman might be helpful without letting things get out of hand with too many categories. That said, without categories it's harder to implement a competition unless folks scan a *lot* of images to see if there's one off on some other page that they'd rate higher or lower than the one they're looking at. I like the idea but not sure the best way to do it so we can see competing coins 'side-by-side'.
PtolemAE
-
I had an idea. Like Gladiators who would have a win and loss count could we do the same for the winners? In other words each time a coin goes head to head with another and wins it could get a point or a stat like 2/2 wins. Possible?
Coins which win a head to head battle in the BOT now get awarded a little laurel-wreath which can be seen when anyone views a winning coin.
Previous BOT contest winners can be found by entering "BOTLAUREL" into the "Search Galleries" box - this will bring up all the previous contest winners irrespective of which gallery they might have been subsequently moved to.
If you enter in "BOTLAUREL" followed by the year (e.g. BOTLAUREL 2014) this will bring up only the previous contest winners from the year you have selected.
[Edit]
I have made this a bit easier, all the Head to Head winners can now be found here: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=112450.0
*Alex.
-
Nice idea to have the competition but since 90% of the coins are Romans it might be nice to have BOT for Roman and another for 'Greek and Other'. The Greek coins kind of get lost in the BOT gallery among all those Romans. One other suggestion is to limit the amount of text accompanying a coin illustration - some of the entries are the length of reference books :) A link to 'more info' might be better - after all we want to look at all the pretty pictures here more than anything else ...
I agree that having too many sub-galleries in BOT might be overkill (Roman alone could have RR, LRB, etc.) but a simple BOT-Greek and BOT-Roman might be helpful without letting things get out of hand with too many categories. That said, without categories it's harder to implement a competition unless folks scan a *lot* of images to see if there's one off on some other page that they'd rate higher or lower than the one they're looking at. I like the idea but not sure the best way to do it so we can see competing coins 'side-by-side'.
PtolemAE
Big thumbs up to this idea. There are some beautiful Greek coins lost in the plethora of Roman denarii.
Having said that, the "top rated" button shows that the Greeks have found their place near the top of the rankings. How long they stay there is anyones guess, since the big push has been to highlight competition between Roman coins.
BR
Mark
-
Nice idea to have the competition but since 90% of the coins are Romans it might be nice to have BOT for Roman and another for 'Greek and Other'. The Greek coins kind of get lost in the BOT gallery among all those Romans. One other suggestion is to limit the amount of text accompanying a coin illustration - some of the entries are the length of reference books :) A link to 'more info' might be better - after all we want to look at all the pretty pictures here more than anything else ...
I agree that having too many sub-galleries in BOT might be overkill (Roman alone could have RR, LRB, etc.) but a simple BOT-Greek and BOT-Roman might be helpful without letting things get out of hand with too many categories. That said, without categories it's harder to implement a competition unless folks scan a *lot* of images to see if there's one off on some other page that they'd rate higher or lower than the one they're looking at. I like the idea but not sure the best way to do it so we can see competing coins 'side-by-side'.
PtolemAE
Big thumbs up to this idea. There are some beautiful Greek coins lost in the plethora of Roman denarii.
Having said that, the "top rated" button shows that the Greeks have found their place near the top of the rankings. How long they stay there is anyones guess, since the big push has been to highlight competition between Roman coins.
BR
Mark
I renamed all the titles of coins in the BOT gallery yesterday, the default order is by title. You can change your viewing sort order but if you leave the default, two coins of the same type (with identical or similar titles) should be next to each other or very close in the sort order. You shouldn't have to use search to browse the BOT at all (but you can). For example, if members start titles for Roman Coins with ROMAN, they will fall into the right order. I will periodically re-title entries to keep a logical sort order.
If you want to see all the Athens tets, scroll until you find the coins starting with "GREEK, Athens..." (some may be "GREEK, Attica, Athens...").
Really a simple system. It is meant only to be good fun and to accumulate a beautiful gallery of coins for everyone to enjoy.
I really fail to see the problem. Thanks to Joe's title renaming, all the Greek coins are already in their own section in the BOT gallery as are the Romans, Byzantines etc.
Dino and I regularly monitor the new additions and ensure that they are displayed in their correct category. The categories appear alphabetically, thus Byzantine followed by Greek appear on the first page.
The gallery order is based on TITLE +. If you have played about with the settings yourself the coins will, of course, be all jumbled up but then the problem is yours, not FORVM's. Order will be restored by clicking on TITLE + in the little blue box on the top right of the page.
Alex.
-
I don't think that Greeks are underrepresented. Especially if you consider the ratio of Greek collectors to Roman collectors who participate in this Forum.
AlexB's Lysimachus (top coin) is hauntingly beautiful:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-14197
Your own Calabria didrachm (bottom coin) is a very elegant coin:
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-70789
and Lloyd too has entered numerous wonderful examples.
-
Do we have to wait for another type of our coin to show up before posting it to BOT? Or should we post our coins that we see best fit to compete?
Thanks
-
No, you do not need to wait. You can post any coin you believe is worthy. It will stay there until it gets beaten by another coin or until it's overall rating drops below a 4 after having received a total of 10 or more votes.
So all your entries are welcome.