You got a signature; what’s next?

What’s your problem? I might say that to some collectors who were acting like a bunch of old ladies, but that is an insult to old ladies. I apologize to every single one of them in advance.

However I ask the question because coin collectors seem to be morphing into Internet-fed gossip mongers who are up to no good.

The most recent target was the Mint’s policy of not requiring signatures when coins are delivered to collector homes.

These collectors complained so loudly that the Mint has now changed its delivery policy effective March 13 to require signatures for packages containing $300 or more in value or precious metal coinage.

Why?

The complaints sprang less from what actually happened in the way of losses suffered to the simple conjecture of what might happen.

What’s next? Demands that collector packages be blue, delivered only between the hours of 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. and that uniformed drivers wear the colors of the local powerhouse football team?

If a business like the Mint thinks the risk of theft is so low that it need not require signature, why should that matter to the collector recipients?

All they need do is accept the coins and enjoy them.

Apparently that isn’t good enough.

I feel like I’m watching an Old West movie scene where someone is waving a pistol at the bar.

“OK, Mint, start dancing.”

Sure enough, the Mint starts dancing.

Is this healthy in the long run?

Collectors often ask what they can do to attract future generations.

The first thing I can think of is to stop acting like creepy old men with too much time on our hands complaining that the world today is nothing like it used to be.

I also remember the complaint letters I used to receive from readers who missed deliveries when signatures were required and then had to drive somewhere to pick up a package that couldn’t be left behind.

Oh boy, I will start getting those complaints again.