1887-O Clash

When I was in college (years ago) near my dorm there was a small amphitheater the students affectionately called free speech alley. I used to love to go there and listen to the crazy people talk. Usually there was only one speaker talking, discussing, sometimes shouting at the blue with no more than ten or twenty people listening. As it turns out I found the speeches were unusual, offbeat and absolutely fascinating.
One sunny afternoon there was a student down at free speech alley shouting to the wind that 'we were all figments of our collective imaginations'. There wasn't a soul down there but him, so I thought I would go sit down and listen. He turned his gaze on me and instead of shouting at the wide blue yonder shouted at me instead. I was in a good mood so I lit a cigarette and listened. After a while I told him I could prove we (collective humanity) weren't figments of our imaginations.

With his hands raised in supplication he shouted at me: How pray tell can you prove this?

I told him logic says if both premises are correct, then the conclusion by necessity must also be correct.
He nodded his head in the affirmative.

First premise. If we exist we can affirm or deny our existence.


He gazed very intently at me.

Second premise. If we do not exist we can not affirm or deny we exist.

He glowered at me.

Conclusion. If we can affirm our existence because we exist and can not affirm our existence if we do not exist,therefore we exist.

He looked at me with eyes that were wildly twitching back and forth and then shouted an obscenity at me and walked off.

I calmly blew a smoke ring at him as he stomped off.

Multiple dies exist. Hmmmmmmm.

Zee, the above story is true. Smoke ring and all.

You have correctly surmised there are two distinct but intertwined issues within this thread. I was smiling when I read them (and still am). It has been a fascinating thread, but to the casual VAM observer a bit too abstract. Sometimes words fail to convey tone and tenor and in this case humor, or at the least a poor attempt at humor.

I wasn't being analogous, and certainly nothing directed at you or anyone else, just my dry sense of humor at such an abstract thought. Multiple dies. Intriguing and maddeningly infuriating as well.
At least we are not discussing dots and scribbles.

Droll is such an absolutely nice word. For those not familar with the word droll, it means whimsical, humorous or odd. But not quite at the level of: antic, chucklesome, comedic, comic, comical, funny, farcical, hilarious, humoristic, humorous, hysterical or hysteric, laughable, ludicrous, ridiculous, riotous, risible, screaming, sidesplitting or uproarious.

Vamming is very technical forensic numismatics. I like to think it is thought provoking.

Zee and Vams for money very nicely articulated a troublesome (to many) aspect of vamming. What should be considered a black and white issue at times isn't.

I believe the 'ring thing' is a piece of cake compared to some of the thoughts flying around here! "I don't think were in Kansas any more Toto"!!

TRANSPARENCY is one thing this site ALLOWS.......YOUR THOUGHTS and ideas
there are thoughts and opinions and questions we ask because:
we: 1) we don't know 2)we have a question as a new commer that doesn't
add up.....
Lack of the Accepted understood answer that doesn't make sense to a common {person} that my friend ZEE so points out...
Its simply...that there is a "code" as much as like in the movie
...Pirates in the Carribian.....the "CODE" is a general idea...Its not
a "LOCKED DOWN" principle...do to the fact that many new findings are found each month....Any way your all in my way of game time,, so have at it..
"

In most conditions in life there are people who, for what ever reason, just follow the person in front of them, or are in other words are sheep.

I, like most others are very opinionated, I believe things that do not seem right are usually going to get me to look for the reasoning behind the same. I am of the opinion that your opinion is worth my listening to for many reasons, 1 being I might learn something I did not know, 2 being a different out look on a topic being discussed and again, I might see some thing I did not and more times than not, I will be able to see another view of the same topic and possibly did not even see before.

I am of the opinion that we as a group are this site, we as a group are setting the "atmosphere" on this site, newcomers, vets, and every where in between are people with a plethora of valuable input for ALL to absorb and process with what we already know and clearly have the ability to dissect these comments, and accept what we believe to be the facts and discard the rest as not being usable or truth.

I like the others on this site or any other would like to feel my opinions are being weighed out for what it is worth, my opinion, truth or something else, and while doing so, set the stage here for how others feel expressing their opinions also. I see the sites information stating there are xxxx people now on this site, I would believe there are a fair amount of people here who I would like to see their input by them posting and being part of the family.

I on the other hand see why people do "lurk", to feel out a place, to see if they think they would like to be a part of any place before being known, before posting and possibly being perceived as a foolish comment by some, which I see every day, me being one of them, LOL.

I would also like to address the transparency comment, I do wish more information were freely given, not necessarily here but on the whole every where, it seems people naturally do not fully disclose all the information on a particular topic, why, I am not sure but it is a frustrating feeling knowing there are things people omit from statements for what ever reasons they might have, greed, profit, what ever the reason I like others, can not help but feel some thing is rotten in Denmark.......Now about that 1887-O Clash....PS, It also should be said, it is a great feeling to know there is a place we as a group can discuss things like this and NOT have to worry about the topic being locked down for reasons a moderator feels the discussion does not merit discussing!!!

A most excellent summary Mike.... very intelligent and encompassing.... the only thing that I might find a bit off color would be this:




Personally, I directly liken this to the old geezer who can catch fish at will..... he has his own secret fishin' holes..... he found these secret honey holes through his own trial and error...... should we ostracize or chastise him for not broadcasting to all where his favorite fishing holes are and how to work them? I think that those who have defined their own system of secret pups are entitled to them, and have no obligation to share this sort of knowledge..... I do not fault anyone for such guarding of what I consider to be the spoils of endeavor.

What other type of "knowledge" or information do such folks possess? Could they tell you what caused this, or why is that? No, and it isn't because they don't want to tell you.... it is because they don't know.

My feelings of disdain are limited to those who promote hype for the purpose of pocket lining..... those who create lists of what you are to be interested in, and conjure definitions that are to be accepted without question.



It never was Gene..... a whole lotta folks were just duped into thinking that for a very long time.

It would be rather naive to think that die marriages could ever be the basis here.... there are just way, way, way too many dies that look exactly (or nearly so) like the next die..... they are virtually indistinguishable..... and so, classification has prevailed as the main theme much like there are certain characteristics that distinguish mammals from birds, amphibians from reptiles, deciduous trees from evergreens, etc. You use this classification system to first identify the hubs, then narrow things down to near and far dates, high and low mm.... These are characteristics of classification.... but there may be hundreds of dies (all) with those same characteristics..... there is no way to definitively distinguish them from one another..... Eight tail feather coins are distinguished by dies, but many other coins are not.... without consistency, what basis for 'knowledge' is there? Dogs and ponies is all I see, and I am not impressed by smoke and mirrors..... (multiple dies = 13 clowns in one tiny car).

The main problem (as I see it) is a lack of consistency.... attribution is based on classification in some instances and on specific dies in other instances..... The OP's coin is vam-13 because vam-13 is based on classification of characteristics...... Bryan's 1878 vam-85 is vam-85 because the nature of this designation is based on specific dies, not characteristic similarities like this vam-13.... the rules change from coin to coin.... the very premise for understanding changes with those rules.... Consistency is non existent, and that is the transparency of vamming (if you can follow what I am saying to you)..... yes, this will change eventually, but it will require a changing of the guard.... a new breed of person or folks who can lay down new rules over this folly that exists today.

by the way the comment of the "G" clash ..is due to that the VW photo's make note of the clash above the wing..a specific rotation noted to be
traditional for a G clash.. but notes no letter transfer for VAM 13..
this I did not see on there 87-0...


I did not see this on there coin..which if normal one would see it as an secondary pick up point...but its all good..