| Author |
Replies: 136 / Views: 4,112 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188924 Posts |
Quote: What is illegal about these designs? Allegedly, the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee did not have an opportunity to review the designs. From the link above: Quote: The quarters' authorizing statute, Public Law No. 116-330, is clear that "each of the designs authorized under this subsection shall be selected by the Secretary after consultation with [sic] Commission of Fine Arts and review by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee [emphasis added]." Nevertheless, the Committee never reviewed, nor was given the opportunity to review, many of the designs, including: https://www.ccac.gov/system/files/2...26_-_508.pdf
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
769 Posts |
I read the law but couldn't find any information on whether the new designs were reviewed by other members of the advisory board or if there was any follow-up to the original letter.
One interesting part is that Public Law No. 116-330 requires "at least one of the quarter dollar designs" to be "emblematic of a woman's or women's contribution to the birth of Nation or the Declaration of Independence or any other monumental moments in American history."
It would have been nice to see a quarter dedicated to Betsy Ross instead of the Gettysburg Address.
Edited by Boba Debt 06/19/2026 3:34 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
769 Posts |
*** Artificial Intelligence (AI) removed per rules. https://www.coincommunity.com/forum...sp#rulesid26 ***Read More: https://goccf.com/t/490235Since MS Copilot's summary was removed, I'll sum up what I learned about Kellen Hoard from the internet. He was a young political activist whose main social media focus was more about his activism than coins. More experienced members of the CCAC did not support him, and the U.S. Mint ignored him. I prefer the new designs over the original ones, so I'm glad the Mint ignored him.
Edited by Boba Debt 06/19/2026 2:48 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
769 Posts |
EDIT, content removed by ME
This seems more like a discussion for a different forum
Edited by Boba Debt 06/19/2026 2:38 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188924 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
769 Posts |
I didn't want to bring this up in this thread because I didn't want to derail it, but I'd be remiss if I didn't at least say this.
It seems like enforcement only happens when someone disagrees with the content.
I've seen plenty of AI images and text posted in threads that wasn't removed.
Edited by Boba Debt 06/19/2026 4:30 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188924 Posts |
Quote: I've seen plenty of AI images and text posted in threads that wasn't removed. We try, but we do not catch it all on our own. Please use the Report this Post to the Staff link at the lower right of the post so we can take action.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
769 Posts |
Much like I recognized the value of Google in its early days, I also see the value of and have no issue with its use.
From experience, I believe AI will become mainstream and accepted even faster than search engines.
BUT back to the topic.
This isn't the first time the Mint has bypassed the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee's review, though I haven't found and old topics were members complained about it.
It should be noted that the law requires all coins to carry the dual date "1776-2026," yet the dollar doesn't, and I seem to be the only one bothered by that.
The coins are also supposed to be emblematic of the United States Semiquincentennial, the 250th anniversary of the nation's founding, but the Gettysburg Address quarter doesn't meet that standard, as others and I have noted.
That said, I like most of the set, especially since the Mint chose to redesign some coins.
If they had gone through the full review process, though, the release would likely have been delayed, and people would be complaining about that instead.
Edited by Boba Debt 06/20/2026 5:52 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12841 Posts |
Mine arrived on Thursday and it looks great.
I know I sound like a broken record but unfortunately that will be the last silver proof set I buy directly from the mint with prices like this.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10566 Posts |
Quote: From experience, I believe AI will become mainstream and accepted even faster than search engines. I agree - AI is horrible (Or are the people that abuse it are horrible?) "AI helped diagnose 18 children whose rare diseases had stumped doctors" https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innova...i-rcna350387
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3472 Posts |
Quote: It should be noted that the law requires all coins to carry the dual date "1776-2026," yet the dollar doesn't, and I seem to be the only one bothered by that. You are not the only person bothered by that. At the very least, the mint should have added the 250 privy to the obverse.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10566 Posts |
OMG - can this possibly be true?
Circulating-Style Commemoratives (Native American $1 Coin): The 2026 Native American $1 coin features a design honoring Polly Cooper sharing corn with George Washington. Because it is categorized under a separate, ongoing commemorative program, it carries the standard single year of issuance (2026) rather than the "1776-2026" dual date.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188924 Posts |
Quote: It should be noted that the law requires all coins to carry the dual date "1776-2026," yet the dollar doesn't, and I seem to be the only one bothered by that. I am bothered by that, but mostly because edge dating has always bothered me.  Quote: the 250th anniversary of the nation's founding, but the Gettysburg Address quarter doesn't meet that standard, as others and I have noted. I have to believe it is because the address specifically points to the founding and how it needed to survive this test. But I will agree that is a debatable connection. 
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188924 Posts |
Quote: OMG - can this possibly be true? Seems plausible. 
|
|
Valued Member
United States
390 Posts |
Quote: At the very least, the mint should have added the 250 privy to the obverse. That is odd, considering the privy is on the American Innovation Dollars. 
|
| |
Replies: 136 / Views: 4,112 |