How long should the shilling and florin have circulated after decimalisation ?

[FosseWay]

Unlikely. Alan71 remembers not knowing and being confused. Children generally don't know things without being told. You were evidently told but simply can't remember being told, just as I can't remember whether I was told the difference between a cat and a dog or whether I deduced it from the names that people around me called them.

I can't find where Alan71 mentioned being confused (I know he wrote something like that but it wasn't in this thread), but the way I remember reading it, it was less a state of confusion as to what a  shilling or florin was worth, and more a lack of understanding of what the text on them actually meant and why they were being used. That is a subtle but important difference.

I would agree with augsburger that there was never any doubt among children as to the value or legitimacy of the shillings and florins in the 1980s and 1990s. In as much as they needed to be referred to at all, kids called them "old 5ps/10ps". Why they were how they were was not relevant to the vast majority of children (people in general, even), and for the small minority like me for whom it was interesting, there were plenty of ways of finding out more, even in the pre-internet days.

[<k>]

I can't find where Alan71 mentioned being confused (I know he wrote something like that but it wasn't in this thread), but the way I remember reading it, it was less a state of confusion as to what a  shilling or florin was worth, and more a lack of understanding of what the text on them actually meant and why they were being used. That is a subtle but important difference.

Which suggests you wouldn't have known what they were until you were told.

I would agree with augsburger that there was never any doubt among children as to the value or legitimacy of the shillings and florins in the 1980s and 1990s.

There was never any doubt, once you had been told. Neither you nor augsburger can prove to me that you're weren't puzzled by them when you first encountered them. I therefore remain unconvinced.

[FosseWay]

How do you expect me to prove a negative? You will have to take my word for it that I was not confused by the presence of predecimal coins in circulation and that I was not aware of anyone around me being confused either.

I didn't know what the Latin text on the coins meant either until I was told: so what?

Children are likely in any case to learn the different coins by means other than reading them in the first instance. While a five-year-old will probably recognise the digits on a coin with digits (which the current series doesn't have), they may well not really understand the relationship between pounds and pence. Far more likely is that they relate value with physical characteristics - tiny bronze, medium-sized bronze, big bronze, and smaller silver and larger silver for the sub-50p denominations in use in the early 80s. And in that case what's actually on the coins is of secondary importance.

I don't dispute that having coins that do not carry the explicit value they are currently worth is suboptimal compared to the opposite. But I remain unconvinced that there were widespread or serious problems with the situation. Someone here or there might have briefly wondered, then found the answer. If there had been widespread problems with people getting the wrong change or whatever else, they would have been reported and acted on, just as the widespread and major problems with large numbers of £1 forgeries led to action in that area.

[augsburger]

How do you expect me to prove a negative? You will have to take my word for it that I was not confused by the presence of predecimal coins in circulation and that I was not aware of anyone around me being confused either.

I didn't know what the Latin text on the coins meant either until I was told: so what?

Children are likely in any case to learn the different coins by means other than reading them in the first instance. While a five-year-old will probably recognise the digits on a coin with digits (which the current series doesn't have), they may well not really understand the relationship between pounds and pence. Far more likely is that they relate value with physical characteristics - tiny bronze, medium-sized bronze, big bronze, and smaller silver and larger silver for the sub-50p denominations in use in the early 80s. And in that case what's actually on the coins is of secondary importance.

I don't dispute that having coins that do not carry the explicit value they are currently worth is suboptimal compared to the opposite. But I remain unconvinced that there were widespread or serious problems with the situation. Someone here or there might have briefly wondered, then found the answer. If there had been widespread problems with people getting the wrong change or whatever else, they would have been reported and acted on, just as the widespread and major problems with large numbers of £1 forgeries led to action in that area.

I wouldn't worry about it, some people are always looking for a fight no matter what the topic is. Those people are best left alone, not worth the hassle.

At no point was I ever confused by these coins. In fact I think I was more confused after they had disappeared and I found out that they had been from a time before I was born. If someone decides they know me better than I know myself, I just laugh.

[<k>]

How do you expect me to prove a negative? You will have to take my word for it that I was not confused by the presence of predecimal coins in circulation and that I was not aware of anyone around me being confused either.

You would not have been confused, once you had been told what they were. If you were a child, growing up after decimalisation, with no prior knowledge of the predecimal system, then the first time you encountered a sixpence in change, you instinctively knew it was 2½p? Pull the other one, FosseWay. Even shillings and florins, though they were of the same size and shape, were completely different in style and appearance, and showed different denominations of which you had no experience - unless somebody had told you about them beforehand. So, at first you would not have known what they were and been confused. Then you would have asked and found out - after which you would no longer have been confused. My point is a simple commonsense and logical one. Can you remember the first time you encountered predecimal coins? Unlike Alan71, you haven't said that you do, so my guess is that you have forgotten your first confusing encounter and just remember knowing what they were. After all, by your own admission, you were only a child.

Children are likely in any case to learn the different coins by means other than reading them in the first instance. While a five-year-old will probably recognise the digits on a coin with digits (which the current series doesn't have), they may well not really understand the relationship between pounds and pence. Far more likely is that they relate value with physical characteristics - tiny bronze, medium-sized bronze, big bronze, and smaller silver and larger silver for the sub-50p denominations in use in the early 80s. And in that case what's actually on the coins is of secondary importance.

But given that the appearance of the obverse and reverse of the predecimals was entirely different, I do doubt that any alert child would NOT have been confused.

But I remain unconvinced that there were widespread or serious problems with the situation.

I never said that "there were widespread or serious problems with the situation". I said that ideally a coin should be instantly recognisable within its system, and for tourists and children this was often not the case, hence my adding that ideally there should be have been a 3 year transition period, up to February 1974, after which the predecimals should have been demonetised and disappeared.

Someone here or there might have briefly wondered, then found the answer.

Agreed, absolutely. There would have been INITIAL confusion, meaning that the coins would NOT have been instantly recognisable within their system.

And augsburger can laugh until he bursts if he wants, but for me his statements are neither logical nor credible. 

[FosseWay]

If you were a child, growing up after decimalisation, with no prior knowledge of the predecimal system, then the first time you encountered a sixpence in change, you instinctively knew it was 2½p? Pull the other one, FosseWay. Even shillings and florins, though they were of the same size and shape, were completely different in style and appearance, and showed different denominations of which you had no experience - unless somebody had told you about them beforehand. So, at first you would not have known what they were and been confused. Then you would have asked and found out - after which you would no longer have been confused. My point is a simple commonsense and logical one. Can you remember the first time you encountered predecimal coins?

I never remember encountering sixpences in use at all, so the issue didn't arise, though I agree that with no other frame of reference the scope for confusion there was greater.

As for the other denominations, in order to make head or tail (sorry...) of anything on the coins you need to be able to read. I encountered coins before I could read and was told what they were and how they related to each other. So the fact they showed different denominations was irrelevant. By the time I could read and had the interest to do so, I knew instinctively what was what, so the circumstance you suggest just didn't arise. You'd do better to ask someone who came to the UK as an adult at some point after 1971 with no prior knowledge of the old system.

I question whether someone momentarily wondering why different coins are in use amounts to "confusion". Yes, someone with no knowledge of why predecimal coins were in use may find it interesting/intriguing/whatever, but I don't see that they are going to be confused as such.

But ultimately, the issue is not whether it was 100% clear to 100% of users 100% of the time. Instead, the pertinent question was whether the benefits of retaining the coins outweighed the small number of problems reported. We can only surmise that the benefits were greater, since otherwise the authorities would have acted differently.

[<k>]

encountered coins before I could read and was told what they were and how they related to each other. So the fact they showed different denominations was irrelevant. By the time I could read and had the interest to do so, I knew instinctively what was what, so the circumstance you suggest just didn't arise.

Clearly children were of different ages and abilities when they encountered predecimals. However, Alan71 has already related how he was confused by them and even by "NEW" on the decimal coins, so we can assume that there were many like him.

You'd do better to ask someone who came to the UK as an adult at some point after 1971 with no prior knowledge of the old system.

I've no doubt that many of them would have been confused too, at least initially. I've already told the story of my German friend who DID have prior experience of the predecimal system: she assumed that because shillings and florins were still in use, the other predecimal coins were still legal tender too. When, in 1987, she tried to buy a newspaper in W H Smith and tendered a couple of threepences and a sixpence, along no doubt with decimal coins, the very young assistant told her, "That's FOREIGN money!" 

I question whether someone momentarily wondering why different coins are in use amounts to "confusion". Yes, someone with no knowledge of why predecimal coins were in use may find it interesting/intriguing/whatever, but I don't see that they are going to be confused as such.

Now we're down to semantics.    Significant numbers of people experiencing even initial confusion amounts to confusion, full stop.

But ultimately, the issue is not whether it was 100% clear to 100% of users 100% of the time. Instead, the pertinent question was whether the benefits of retaining the coins outweighed the small number of problems reported. We can only surmise that the benefits were greater, since otherwise the authorities would have acted differently.

It depends how you judge it, for it is a question of judgement. Different sets of authorities make different judgements. The pre-1964 Conservative government planned for a 20p decimal coin and the use of "DECIMAL" on the legends. The Labour government that followed opted for no 20p coin and for "NEW" instead. A lot of the time, the "predecimals within the decimal system" issue was just allowed to drift, because our short-lived governments had other priorities. That's just how it was. Demising the predecimals by 1974 would not have involved a huge amount of effort or expense. I think it would have been worth it - you do not. We must continue to disagree. After all, it's not my fault that you have all the wrong opinions. 

[Alan71]

Unlikely. Alan71 remembers not knowing and being confused. Children generally don't know things without being told. You were evidently told but simply can't remember being told, just as I can't remember whether I was told the difference between a cat and a dog or whether I deduced it from the names that people around me called them.

Not sure I was confused as such...  I didn't know what a shilling was (other than that it must equate to 5p) and I knew they must be old (but then, anything before my lifetime was ancient to me!) but I think I did just accept them.  I can't recall being given one and asking "but this isn't a 5p or 10p" or anything like that.  I had no idea that a shilling contained 12 old pence, but there was no reason for me to know that.

This thread is getting a bit heated... can we tone it down a bit, please?

[<k>]

Not knowing can imply confusion. We're down to semantics again. Anyway, I think I've shown enough evidence of confusion and potential confusion. Nor is it really clear how much people can know about their childhood or when they knew, or didn't know, certain facts.

[andyg]

Even now people spend things that are the right size over what it says on them, that's how the Jersey / Guernsey etc  get about.  This whole argument is somewhat immaterial anyway as the coins went over 20 years ago so I don't really see the point of such a nasty fuss being made about this long dead issue.

[Alan71]

And augsburger can laugh until he bursts if he wants, but for me his statements are neither logical nor credible. 

Not to you perhaps, but I can't see anything in his or others' posts on here where I could agree with you.  You seem to be getting a bit obsessed with this subject, and unpleasantness isn't called for.  Fine, decimalisation wasn't done in the way you would have liked it, but I'm not sure the vast majority of people would either agree with you or care.  Put it into perspective, as andyg has just brilliantly done so.

[<k>]

Even now people spend things that are the right size over what it says on them, that's how the Jersey / Guernsey etc  get about.

Meaningless sentence. Please rephrase.

This whole argument is somewhat immaterial anyway as the coins went over 20 years ago so I don't really see the point of such a nasty fuss being made about this long dead issue.

In your opinion. It's not an argument, it's a debate. "Nasty fuss" is not a statement of fact - it is a highly tendentious opinion. There is nothing wrong with debating how things might have been done better. That's how people improve. Why you intrude now to include the words "nasty fuss" when it's not your board and when you haven't previously been involved in the discussion, I really don't know.

[<k>]

Not to you perhaps, but I can't see anything in his or others' posts on here where I could agree with you.  You seem to be getting a bit obsessed with this subject, and unpleasantness isn't called for.

I'm not obsessed, and if I am obsessed, then FosseWay seems at least as obsessed to rebut my points. Nor was I being unpleasant. I was making serious points about how and when you get to know coins. If people don't want to engage with my serious points and just talk about laughing at them instead, well, you might consider that provocative.

  Fine, decimalisation wasn't done in the way you would have liked it, but I'm not sure the vast majority of people would either agree with you or care. 

Sure, it's history, but it's just a discussion, and people did care enough to get involved in the discussion. And I'm sure it will have shed some light about how decisions are taken, and how different authorities, e.g. governments, have different ideas about how to manage the coinage. And the topic has had 276 views in a week, which should you tell you something. There's nothing wrong with a bit of vigorous discussion or disagreement.

Put it into perspective, as andyg has just brilliantly done so.

In your opinion. In mine, he has added nothing to the discussion, being just a last minute interloper.

[Figleaf]

Can we tone it down a bit, please? One of our strengths is that we can discuss anything and everybody's contribution is welcome. Let's remember that this is about history. It's not going to change anything in the past or present. Differences of opinion are fine, but we are veering too close towards bitterness and personal attacks at this point. Take a deep breath, enjoy a really good coffee and relax, so the fun can come back.

Peter

[<k>]

OK, let me make one or two points. Some people say I can be sarcastic. Well, that's not a crime, and I'm also even sarcastic about myself at times:

http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,39788.msg252931.html#msg252931

http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,19024.msg253133.html#msg253133



Getting personal - well, we are all persons posting here. And reacting to what we each write. So in a sense we can't help being personal. However, sometimes we get too personal - or critical - at times. It's hard to gauge, as each of us has different limits. Let me say this: on another site, somebody who lives thousands of miles away from me threatened to "punch my [expletive deleted] lights out" if they ever met me. I wasn't frightened by that, of course, but I complained at the lack of netiquette. The site owner thought it clearly wasn't a serious threat, so the post was allowed to stand and the poster was not even admonished. We have come nowhere near that low level in this topic, so that puts things in perspective a bit.

I did feel I was being attacked unduly here. Even when the moderator asked us to tone things down, he then sided with another poster against me instead of trying to be impartial. Never mind - worse things happen at sea.    I also got "reported". Instead of defending his statements when I criticised them, the poster issued his usual cry that I was trying to "start a fight". Really! We need to be a bit more robust round here. Be prepared to back up your statements - that's all. In that regard, I'd like to commend FosseWay - he and I probably disagree on most things, but he will always defend his views if I criticise them and ask him to back them up. Even then, I still may not agree with him, but so what? I too am always prepared to defend my views. On the odd occasion when I think I am proved wrong, I will concede - or I will concede part of a point. So please - learn to be a little more robust. 

Finally, the attacks turned to, "oh, it's just history, it's not important, nobody cares now". Well, by that token, everything before this moment is history and therefore unimportant. But likewise the whole of this site is also about history, but actually we do care. We can learn from history. We can learn to do things better. And even if we don't, we can maybe learn to appreciate a different perspective on things. Some issues come into clearer focus for us. In these topics I have shown that we Brits did things differently: we stuck to the weight-to-value ratio; we considered it OK not to issue a 20p early, to bridge the gap between the 10p and the 50p. I have shown how these could have been seen as disadvantageous  - others have disagreed. I think that for sure, many of the Continental European countries would have done things differently and did not regard the weight-to-value ratio, for instance, as best practice.

As for my polls, two people agreed it was right to demonetise the shilling and florin in 1990 and 1993 respectively, but two people thought that 1972 and 1980 would have been better - against my suggestion of 1974. So, some members did not think that what happened was actually for the best. Did my topics have an effect - or would they have thought that anyway? That's another reason why I thought the attacks on my topic as being about useless past history, and therefore not worthwhile, were unfair. But ultimately, it doesn't matter if you disagree. And of course we had only a tiny sample here, but to the members, to the forum, our participating members do matter.

Admittedly, this topic came to seem a bit like Korea towards the end.    (North Korea has just fired a missile over Japan - or close to it). Perhaps the current disharmony is affecting everyone - or perhaps not.

I will do another poll about another past issue soon. Let me just say in advance, if you think that discussing and analysing what might have been done differently is boring rubbish and a waste of time, then please don't bother posting in my forthcoming topic. Otherwise, you are welcome - but be prepared to have your views robustly challenged and to defend them just as robustly.