Do Cleaned Coins Bother You?

I've certainly owned market-acceptable coins that were likely cleaned many years ago, as well as many pre-1930 "blast white" type coins that have likely been dipped but were in straight holders and met all other quality criteria.

There's a big difference in cleaning and conserving in my option. If the action causes detectable surface damage or defacement then for my money I'd rather own a lower grade original or more natural specimen.

I agree with the above...I only try to buy original coins at this point in my collection career. I find a nice looking original coin is hard to find and holds its value over cleaned ones and is worth the wait.

Lately I've been buying nice grade circulated early Wheaties with dirt or crud problems . First they get an Acetone bath ,maybe a little light tooth pick action . Then they get a good application of Verdi-care with soft cloth or Q-tip .The end results for most of the coins are phenomenal . This is NOT considered coin cleaning .

Thanks for the acknowledgement, Jbuck. While my post has a somewhat humorous intent, I was speaking from a practical view. The original question speaks mostly to eye-appeal, it seems. While I like pretty coins, I tend to find beauty in the history of where a coin's been, who held it, how was it used and more. Counterstamped coins often reveal that sort of beauty.

Oftentimes, counterstamped coins benefit from a gentle "cleaning" with acetone or Coin Care. Lacking such conservation, potentially harmful debris will remain in the recessed stamp. Note that the counterstamped coin in my previous post was scrubbed by someone other than I. Sadly, my attempts to attribute this counterstamp have so far borne no fruit.

Yes. If they look obviously cleaned it looks bad to me, and so it is how it looks that does matter in the end.