ANACS has also reminded me why I hate USPS Registered Mail. Takes half a century for a package to go from one coast of the USA to the other.  I just ran into this a couple weeks ago except the package was only going a short distance. I was under the impression Registered was a higher level of quality than Priority but I haven't seen it recently. They seem to be shipping all cryptos via usps registered mail. Which is safer than UPS, but does take longer... It's tracked the whole way, and only specific people can deliver registered mail as well. That's why it takes longer, but you almost never lose registered mail. Registered is the best if you are not in a rush. Not only is the package signed for every time someone handles it, but it is also stored in a safe at each location. USPS Registered is the safest way to ship in the USA hands down. I do agree having to show up at the post office is a hassle, but with the value of these coins it is well worth it imo. |
|
|
|
~
These slabs will be rare since we are telling ANACS to get fucked so you best get one for history's sake! Note the amazing hologram ANACS placed on this slab...the precision is simply amazing.
This is one of the best Auction intro I came across so far! Made me chuckle!  I tend to agree and nevertheless rare item. Ha! My thoughts exactly. Considering bidding just because I was so entertained by that ANACS hate. Bid it to the moon then! If I were bidding I would drop a crazy high bid to show everyone who is boss  |
|
|
|
0.68 BTC  Top bid with 5 hours left to go. |
|
|
|
|
Roughly 21 hours left on this one and DebitMe has the top bid @ .66BTC
|
|
|
|
I am always so insulted that I am never accused of having an alt account. Can someone please accuse me of that...thanks! Blazed =  ? ? is an alt of Blazed etc... |
|
|
|
0.6
The slab alone is worth .6 BTC. Let’s pump this coin hard since this is such a special auction |
|
|
|
This is the first Casascius coin to be auctioned with the baller green slab so bid this thing to the moon and back.... These slabs will be rare since we are telling ANACS to get fucked so you best get one for history's sake! Note the amazing hologram ANACS placed on this slab...the precision is simply amazing. Starting Bid: .5 BTCBidding Increments: .01 BTCAuction End: 2/19/2018 @ 9:00 PM EDT -> https://time.is/New_YorkShipping: Paid By Winner   |
|
|
|
I feel that Lauda does a lot more good than harm for the forum and that is why I keep him in my trust list.
I'm not going to be the only person that's disappointed by this being the voiced criteria and reasoning for this. I don't disagree with the statement, but I disagree that this should be the criteria for keeping them on your list. There are plenty of people that do more good than harm that still do a tremendous amount of harm, so much so that it would be very dangerous to use this reasoning. You should keep them on your trust if you feel that they are very unlikely to do any meaningful damage to the forum in a way that violates or abuses the responsibility that comes along with DT; plus there should be significant benefit for their addition. This reminds me of Dave Chapelle's bit about Bill Cosby; "He saves more than he rapes!"  The significant benefit is that he tags scammers and helps keep that under control. Will he sometimes mess up with a rating?? most likely, but if/when he does he just needs to make it right. The trust system is not perfect, but no one can come up with a better one so it is what it is. Obviously other members of DT1 agree he is valuable otherwise he would not be back on. Thanks for leaving Lauda in your trust list. You are the reason why the forum is chasing away good members. Good to know that moderators and DT members accept extortionist in their trust list. Looking at his feedback I am not seeing good members being chased off...please give me some examples of his feedback towards good members that should be changed? |
|
|
|
I feel that Lauda does a lot more good than harm for the forum and that is why I keep him in my trust list.
I'm not going to be the only person that's disappointed by this being the voiced criteria and reasoning for this. I don't disagree with the statement, but I disagree that this should be the criteria for keeping them on your list. There are plenty of people that do more good than harm that still do a tremendous amount of harm, so much so that it would be very dangerous to use this reasoning. You should keep them on your trust if you feel that they are very unlikely to do any meaningful damage to the forum in a way that violates or abuses the responsibility that comes along with DT; plus there should be significant benefit for their addition. This reminds me of Dave Chapelle's bit about Bill Cosby; "He saves more than he rapes!" The significant benefit is that he tags scammers and helps keep that under control. Will he sometimes mess up with a rating?? most likely, but if/when he does he just needs to make it right. The trust system is not perfect, but no one can come up with a better one so it is what it is. Obviously other members of DT1 agree he is valuable otherwise he would not be back on. No, more members of DT1 disagree with you than agree. I also don't think he's ever stopped a scam. He tried to pull an extortion scam, sure, that's documented. What scam has he ever stopped? When a majority of the forum is showing red trust, all it does is water down what that means. Nobody is trusting newbies with crap posts on trades without escrow and signature campaign managers can do their own research if they have a shred of competence. What Lauda is doing is bad for Bitcoin adoption, bad for bitcointalk, and bad for anyone trying to engage in peaceful discussion with likeminded individuals using this forum. Please, tell me what scam you avoided as a result of Lauda's trust ratings which you praise so highly. From what I can tell it is an even split with 3 being for him (myself, hilarious, and salty) and 3 being against (you, HostFat, and TC). I have looked through his ratings multiple times and agree with most of his feedbacks regarding account sales, scams, shit posting, account farming, alt accounts, people who have defaulted on loans, etc... It is impossible to say what he has prevented because with his feedback those people are not trusted to pull there crap again. We need these types of users stopped and he is willing to spend the time to go after them. I have watched this forum go downhill for years due to the above crap with no other fixes in sight... Do you prefer people to farm, spam, scam, etc... with hardly any repercussions? If you have a better method for helping to clean things up by all means tell me. |
|
|
|
I feel that Lauda does a lot more good than harm for the forum and that is why I keep him in my trust list.
I'm not going to be the only person that's disappointed by this being the voiced criteria and reasoning for this. I don't disagree with the statement, but I disagree that this should be the criteria for keeping them on your list. There are plenty of people that do more good than harm that still do a tremendous amount of harm, so much so that it would be very dangerous to use this reasoning. You should keep them on your trust if you feel that they are very unlikely to do any meaningful damage to the forum in a way that violates or abuses the responsibility that comes along with DT; plus there should be significant benefit for their addition. This reminds me of Dave Chapelle's bit about Bill Cosby; "He saves more than he rapes!" The significant benefit is that he tags scammers and helps keep that under control. Will he sometimes mess up with a rating?? most likely, but if/when he does he just needs to make it right. The trust system is not perfect, but no one can come up with a better one so it is what it is. Obviously other members of DT1 agree he is valuable otherwise he would not be back on. |
|
|
|
Can I receive one more point of clarification, since the topic seems timely... ? Since SaltySpitoon just added Lauda to his trust network, does that mean that Lauda is back on DT2? In other words, how many DT1 trust lists does Lauda have to be on in order to qualify for DT2? just one?
While I have never claimed to be knowledgeable about DT this and that (cause I don't care), my trust rating has gone back up the ten points it dropped when she was excluded... so I would say YES she is back on DT2. One other DT1 member's exclusion will be needed to remove her ( I think). I checked, and yes, Lauda is back on DT2. I don't know shit about how many exclusions etc though. Just to confirm: any user is on DT2 if included by at least one DT1 and if DT1 inclusions >= DT1 exclusions. So a total of 0 is enough (that's why I'm on DT2 even though excluded by OgNasty). Now Lauda is included by SaltySpitoon, Blazed and hilariousandco; and excluded by HostFat, OgNasty and Tomatocage. The total is 0 and therefore she's on DT2. One single more exclusion from DT1 would remove her from DT2. Looking like cats do have 9 lives after all. I feel that Lauda does a lot more good than harm for the forum and that is why I keep him in my trust list. |
|
|
|
I have been outspoken against ANACS in the past because I think they are terrible at maintaining consistency. I actually like the new green labels over the ugly yellow ones though and think it's nice they are being honest by pointing out that they have no idea about the actual crypto value.
That being said, those holograms are ridiculous. Maybe they were trying to get rid of their damaged ones first or something? I'd send them back to be redone and ask for some sort of future discount for your trouble. I also agree that finding a replacement that cares about the community, or having someone here with the time and experience to start their own grading service are great ideas.
Every single hologram I got back today has either small rips or scuffing on them. If ANACS did not want our business why not just stop accepting the coins? |
|
|
|
those do look terrible. if we stop using ANACS this will have been wasted money on their end and it should send a strong message from our community.
has anyone ever received an ANACS graded Cas or similar from someone outside of this forum or is it mainly us sending these in and circulating them?
I am pretty sure the bulk of ANACS crypto grading business used to come from just a handful of people here on this forum. Fixed that for you* |
|
|
|
Blazed, maybe you need to start your own grading certification company for physical cryptos. You could add features like a balance check QR code, a warning alert for reports of compromised coins, and a record keeping option for chain of custody.
I did the math on this as as few of us were considering such a venture. There is simply not enough volume (revenue) to cover operating costs (insurance, facility, admin, etc..) Edit to add: new label is horrible and that warning will scare away any new collectors. The application of the hologram shows how little they care about looking professional. Fuck ANACS! Oh, multiple holograms are shitty like that. I will add a picture to show you just how terrible these are...  |
|
|
|
These are pretty ugly, but I get why the added the warning. Love the quality of the hologram on that second slab...almost looks like a 12 year old applied it.   |
|
|
|
|
Given the recent events with ANACS, I was wondering what the community was thinking. Long story short: ANACS has been the standard we have used since 2013 for grading and they clearly do not care about us. Some simple facts so far...
1) ANACS is the 3rd best grading company (NGC and PCGS are better, but will not grade our coins).
2) ICGS is considered the 4th best, but is willing to grade our coins.
3) ANACS decided to hold our coins hostage while not telling us so they can get new labels and also jacked the prices up.
4) ANACS made it pretty clear to multiple customers that we really do not matter based on their responses to us.
|
|
|
|
|
So what is everyone's thoughts on using ICGS? I just think it is a step backwards from ANACS and even ANACS is bottom of the barrel. I really prefer my coins slabbed because they are easier to manage and look consistent rather than 10 different types of air-tites etc... Part of me says we were getting a good deal with ANACS, but the way they handled this change was bullshit. I think we as a community should decide to either:
1) Boycott ANACS and let them know (not that they will really care)
2) Keep using ANACS and suck it up
3) Use ICGS
4) Just leave them in air-tites and continue hating on ANACS
5) ?!?!
|
|
|
|
I've always had a good experience with ICG on my regular coin submissions. Haven't tried any cryptos yet, but will be in the future. $29 is total BS for ANACS to be charging.
Does anyone have a link to the their form or whatever? Thanks! Agreed, it would be good to add a link to their form. What does ICG charge for grading? A few years ago I cracked some slabs from ICG and sent to ANACS and they grade them differently. ANACS was consistently 1 grade lower. The thread showed me cracking the slabs and getting new grades etc... I do recall it being in auctions for some reason... Not uncommon among grading companies for there to be a variance. Even NGC and PCGS rarely agree, unless they are fresh from the mint moderns. ICG may routinely grade higher in the hopes of you using their service again. ICG and ANACS trade at a discount relative to NGC and PCGS anyway, so I wouldn't send any coins to them that I was hoping to get a super premium for the grade. For cryptos I don't see it as a big deal if ANACS says something is a 67 and ICG says 68. For a rare Morgan CC that could make a huge difference in price, but for this market it's more the 3rd party trust of the encapsulated coin and intact hologram versus the condition of the coin. Especially since most of what is in this space are just brass tokens or plastic poker chips. Some silver and gold splashed in here and there, but mostly ugly looking brass.  The big issue for me is that we have used the ANACS standard since 2013. I would just assume not grade coins at this point rather than using an even lowered tier grading service such as ICGS. Well that's fair enough. To each his own. FWIW though eBay recognizes ICG as one of 4 approved 3PG companies that you can list on their site. Also, if you look at ICG's grading team on their website they have as much experience as any graders in the business and a couple of them worked for NGC and another for ANACS. One guy was even a consultant for the Secret Service in authenticating coins. So it's not like some random guys that opened up a grading service with little or no experience. With that said, I'd love it if PCGS or NGC would start grading cryptos, but after the nonsense coming out of ANACS lately ICG is at least worth consideration. I agree that ANACS sucks and is considered #3 grading wise after PCGS and NGC. I think it sucks to move from the 3rd best to the 4th best service though. Why even bother grading these if the name on the slab is considered crap? I only graded coins in the past for higher resale values (buy the coin sell the slab). Personally, I am done grading these coins until PCGS or NGC starts accepting them. I think we should really reach out to them and see what it takes for them to grade for us. |
|
|
|
I've always had a good experience with ICG on my regular coin submissions. Haven't tried any cryptos yet, but will be in the future. $29 is total BS for ANACS to be charging.
Does anyone have a link to the their form or whatever? Thanks! Agreed, it would be good to add a link to their form. What does ICG charge for grading? A few years ago I cracked some slabs from ICG and sent to ANACS and they grade them differently. ANACS was consistently 1 grade lower. The thread showed me cracking the slabs and getting new grades etc... I do recall it being in auctions for some reason... Not uncommon among grading companies for there to be a variance. Even NGC and PCGS rarely agree, unless they are fresh from the mint moderns. ICG may routinely grade higher in the hopes of you using their service again. ICG and ANACS trade at a discount relative to NGC and PCGS anyway, so I wouldn't send any coins to them that I was hoping to get a super premium for the grade. For cryptos I don't see it as a big deal if ANACS says something is a 67 and ICG says 68. For a rare Morgan CC that could make a huge difference in price, but for this market it's more the 3rd party trust of the encapsulated coin and intact hologram versus the condition of the coin. Especially since most of what is in this space are just brass tokens or plastic poker chips. Some silver and gold splashed in here and there, but mostly ugly looking brass. The big issue for me is that we have used the ANACS standard since 2013. I would just assume not grade coins at this point rather than using an even lowered tier grading service such as ICGS. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
