Amending the 04-O VAMs 22A1/2 pages to help clarify the story?

[keilg1]

Suspecting @Kurt28 or @LateDateMorganGuy or many of you other experts can help here. Perhaps this will change as we enter into the next phase of variety descriptions - more clearly defined along die pairing and not general descriptions.

Love the reverse story that it was used multiple times in succession: V22A1 to the V12B to the V12A to the V22A2.

The obverse story is more sordid and not as well explained on the webpages. The obverses for each of the 12 flavors are the same, but the obverses for the 22A1 and 22A2 are obviously different (and mentioned): 22A1 being LE3RE4 and the 22A2 being further right (and differences in doubling, etc.). Both flavors were categorized as 'normal' dates by Leroy all those years back and the link of the reverse was an understandable connection between the two, but now that we know them to be different dies, should the 22A2 be designated a different variety?

I know, complicates things, but is more aligned to the new process? Obviously ultimately a decision by JB and JR but we can start the discussion?

[LateDateMorganGuy]

There is a lot going on with the 04-O series, including die incest. While only JB/JR can change listings, they seem to me to work well as is.

[LateDateMorganGuy]

Does this help?

[Albannach]

I like the fact you have opened this discussion. Without getting too far into the weeds…
If a variety is listed for say obverse n clash and gouge at M UNUM… does the reverse even matter? Historically the answer is nope. Let’s call it 15A. Then we have the gouge w no n clash found, 15 B is born. In my mind that rev is the 15 die pair
Now as the dies move further along their life journey a reverse break appears and is listed with the gouge obv, then some crazy nut doing a study realizes the broken reverse is a different die than the 15A and B

In this example I wold love to see it called a 133 ( or whatever) BUT the 15 basically was listed with obverse pups
I think in this example we are fine to call it a 15 c and note the new marriage on the 15 pages
To call it a 133 with a shared 15 obverse seems stupidly silly to me
My 2 cents
Fire away

[keilg1]

Thanks, @LateDateMorganGuy, my friend. I so appreciate the flow chart (and the other ones I've seen) as it (they) help, but without explanation this might confuse some. To clarify: the boxes that say 'Obv. Die' or 'Rev. Die' means that die was used to create the next variant (and in succession), which implies the other die was different.

What isn't as well captured to me is the essence of my question: the obverses of 22A1 and 22A2 are different so they might not be indicated as it appears - the obverse got switched between the 22A1 forming the 12B then 12A, but was then switched back to (re)form the 22B2 (i.e., same obverse as the 22A1).

Simply wondering if there's a better way to capture the full story.

Thanks for sharing and discussing!