2014 Shenandoah P, Stuff On Both Sides

And here's the reverse. The best I've been able to compare it to is photos of mints and proofs, which is not ideal for obvious reasons. I sure wish I had another Shenandoah; then I'd use the same camera settings and get the best possible comparisons of the devices and lettering.

Just comparing to online photos, it appears most lettering is closer than normal to the rim, and there is rim doubling, so the overall effect is stretching/blurring (?) of the bottoms of the bottom words, and the tops of 'Shenandoah.'
As for the device, for all I know the whole thing is loopy, but I definitely see issues with the branches above and behind the hiker. I don't know if they're doubled, but the rim pushes further into them than in online photos.



From this angle (below) you can see where the rim switches course, between the U and N of 'UNUM.'



Motto closeup:



If nothing else, there's this 'E.'

It's the wording. I said I'm a newbie and I spent all day studying this coin. Obviously I was excited about it, and obviously it was for nothing. I appreciate the 'Welcome' icon and yes I appreciate an honest answer even if it's dissapointing. Can you really not imagine being told something you were excited about is "nothing but a.." the very first time you ask anyone? Something like, "Sorry but this is a common mistake" or whatever would have been kinder. That's all I'm saying.

We're sorry if anything said offended you. Wording is subjective and some take it different then others. It takes us a while to get to know each individual member. But that being said to the forum.

I'm sorry but it doesn't sound snotty to me at all. I think you were expecting a snotty answer, so that's what you saw.

to the Community!

When I looked up DDD, for the life of me I cannot see how you can reliably tell the difference between it and a valuable error. And I looked at LOTS of photo examples, along with several author's descriptions on what key differences to look for. There was so much overlap in diagnostics, and so much differently-interpretable language used for the descriptions, I don't see how even the highest experts don't have fierce debates over some coins. I'm not talking about very clearcut ones like the Duke Ellington 'ELL' one. --That's very easy to see and it's also not one of a kind. But every error coin with a population of 'multiple' must have a first one discovered by somebody, so what happens when the cause of doubling is 'if-y'? I'm not trying to argue about my 'nothing' quarter; if everybody says it's from a deteriorated die I obvioiusly have no leg to stand on.
But can anyone tell me what details the see in my coin prove it's a DDD, and how it would look different if it had whatever more magical error that would make it valuable?
By the way, why IS whatever other kind of doubling treasured while DDD is not? Seems like a very silly distinction, and in fact many of the 'legit' doubling photos I saw were barely-detectible compared to DDD ones (some of those looked pretty WOW to me). At least wrong-planchet coins make for kind of a cool story, as do coins that are rare because of some historical perspective, but "this malfunction" versus "that malfunction" occurring in a machine seems utterly arbitrary.

I forgot to ask, what could have caused that slash through the U in QUARTER? Also both A's in QUARTER and DOLLAR have a weird arc doubling inside the enclosed triangle. What causes that?