CassTaylor
Joined: 30-May-2014
Posts: 8551
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 00:23
#
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 00:23
#
Hello,
There has been a lot of debate that the Numista rarity index is not reflective of rarity/value, and while I have my own doubts about its accuracy and usefulness (especially with regards to new members mistaking 100 NRI for a super valuable coin), I thought this suggestion would at least make what we have better and more accurate.
My suggestion is instead of having a NRI for the whole coin page, each year line has its own NRI number. This would save us from having rare dates of common coins on a page with a very low NRI, for example, and be more accurate in determining a coin's actual rarity (still not reliable, but better at least).
ken6528
Joined: 11-Sep-2009
Posts: 1412
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 01:01
#
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 01:01
#
That is what my suggestion I submitted months ago would solve.
https://en.numista.com/forum/topic72983.html
neilithicman
Joined: 22-Nov-2017
Posts: 945
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 02:50
#
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 02:50
#
Pretty sure it's been suggested numerous times over the years, pretty sure I've suggested it myself a couple of times.
I thought the whole idea of including the values was to replace the NRI so you can see rarity by seeing how much people are paying for the coins.
What? Me Worry
CassTaylor
Joined: 30-May-2014
Posts: 8551
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 06:00
#
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 06:00
#
I thought it'd have been suggested previously, but let's see if we can't make it stick this time.
neilithicman
Joined: 22-Nov-2017
Posts: 945
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 20:56
#
Posted: 8-Nov-2018, 20:56
#
Now that we've got values I'd rather see the "rarity" index gone altogether.
What? Me Worry
January First-of-May
Joined: 10-Apr-2016
Posts: 887
Posted: 9-Nov-2018, 12:33
#
Posted: 9-Nov-2018, 12:33
#
Quote: "neilithicman"Now that we've got values I'd rather see the "rarity" index gone altogether.
No, it's still pretty useful. Some coins are relatively common but valuable - either due to being made of precious metal, or just because they're popular; some are much scarcer but aren't worth much because almost nobody cares about them. (Some are common and nobody cares about them; those usually seem to have a NRI in the 20s and tiny values.)
And of course most everything with a NRI over 70 is unlikely to end up with a value anytime soon. Neither are the less common dates of common types, for that matter.
(And even the common dates of common types all too often don't have a value yet either, though this is becoming less common lately; my personal "estimate" number, i.e. the fraction of coins in my collection that have values in the database, is up to 57%.)
numinis
Joined: 19-Aug-2015
Posts: 561
Posted: 10-Nov-2018, 06:39
#
Posted: 10-Nov-2018, 06:39
#
Quote: "neilithicman"Now that we've got values I'd rather see the "rarity" index gone altogether.
I would like to keep it. I think multiple indices are much better than none, even if they are occasionaly unreliable.
By the way, in Colnect and uCoin it is also possible to see statistics on how many people have (or claim to have) a coin. Unfortunately, in uCoin this feature is somewhat hidden, but it is even available for individual years. So if you have doubts whether NRI is accurate in a specific case, and this question is important to you, you can compare what different sites say. If diverse sources agree, this could be a basis for more warranted conclusions.
ūūūūū
Sjoelund
Joined: 28-Mar-2012
Posts: 12373
Posted: 25-Nov-2018, 22:24
#
Posted: 25-Nov-2018, 22:24
#
Quote: "neilithicman"Now that we've got values I'd rather see the "rarity" index gone altogether.
Hi,
I agree on this, since that index is just worth nothing....
Ole
Globetrotter
Coin varieties in French:
https://monnaiesetvarietes.numista.com
Arusak
Joined: 18-Mar-2017
Posts: 672
Posted: 26-Nov-2018, 05:43
#
Posted: 26-Nov-2018, 05:43
#
I don't see the issue myself. The NRI shouldn't be used for a value of your coins, rather as a neat statistic. And it doesn't claim to be an accurate "rarity" of each year, rather of each type, since pages are done by type and not by year.
CassTaylor
Joined: 30-May-2014
Posts: 8551
Posted: 26-Nov-2018, 09:57
#
Posted: 26-Nov-2018, 09:57
#
Quote: "Sjoelund"
Quote: "neilithicman"Now that we've got values I'd rather see the "rarity" index gone altogether.
Hi,
I agree on this, since that index is just worth nothing....
Ole
Come to think of it, since referees can see how many members claim to own a date, an alternative that I propose we make that visible to everyone instead and eliminate the NRI altogether.
Status changed to Rejected
(Xavier, 5-Feb-2019, 22:41)
Xavier
Site admin
Joined: 16-Jan-2007
Posts: 7773
Posted: 5-Feb-2019, 22:43
#
Posted: 5-Feb-2019, 22:43
#
Hello,
I don't believe a NRI per year line would be meaningful, especially if you start comparing the NRI of year lines across different coins. Instead, I would prefer giving indication of how many people own each year line. This was requested here:
https://en.numista.com/forum/topic72983.html
Sjoelund
Joined: 28-Mar-2012
Posts: 12373
Posted: 5-Feb-2019, 22:52
#
Posted: 5-Feb-2019, 22:52
#
Quote: "Xavier"Hello,
I don't believe a NRI per year line would be meaningful, especially if you start comparing the NRI of year lines across different coins. Instead, I would prefer giving indication of how many people own each year line. This was requested here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic72983.html
Whatever, that index is not objective, specifically not for the year lines, but even for the type it's no good, the population of numista is too small for that kind of things. The worst is that quite a few people believe in it...
Stop using the index would be my suggestion!
Ole
Globetrotter
Coin varieties in French:
https://monnaiesetvarietes.numista.com
Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 12:13.