Dissappointed With New Site.....attn Bill Weiss!

http://www.stampsmarter.com/
1st....everyone here knows Bill Weiss is campaigning to stop misidentified/unlisted faulty items @ ebay....
He has started a new website....along with 1-2 others....
2nd....they state everyone should use their REAL names....
3rd....I used the "contact us" button to voice my concern and the email was returned/bounced back.

I have viewed a few items at this site....
I see members using alias....hiding behing the likes of "TheReporter".
The rules state certain conditions....They have already violated these.
Rules state....you scould not call any item FAKE unless you have possession....you should say..."in my opinion"....or the likes.
There are only about 30 items listed....but these rules are broken on about half of them.

BILL....we are friends, you know that....if you post the rules for all to follow....lets follow them.

Oh well...

Bill W...I tried to send this to you first....
thru the "contact us" button at the site yesterday....
this AM...got the return email...bounced.

Kevin504,

I used the "Contact Us" button yesterday, without a problem and got a response this morning. The site is still "Under Construction" and I'm sure all feedback is welcomed by both Don & Bill. I think everyone realizes that the development of the site is not done by Bill, but by Don. Bill may provide ideas but I don't think he actually slings any code. If he does, my hat's off to an old man learning new tricks.

I found out this am that Don's wife is in the hospital and due out later this week so I'm not surprised that response time is longer than it perhaps should be. Actually, after finding this out, I was surprised that I got a response at all.

He needs input on things that will make the site a better and more useful tool. If I can suggest, review all aspects of the site, document what you do and don't like about it, make suggestions for enhancements and any ideas that will be useful.

Note: I am not associated with the site in any way. But I have made various suggestions and comments concerning the site and they have been taken under consideration. Don't expect all the suggestions to be acted upon quickly or even taken. At this point, we can consider ourselves part of a review committee and I appreciate that opportunity.

Art

Kevin,
I am the developer of the site. You can contact me through this forum and we can hook up with emails if desired.

Members must supply their real names and email address to get a membership but are not required to use them in their reviews. This seems fair, we want people to be held accountable but do not want to force people to expose themselves publically if they so wish. (For example, identifying yourself as a stamp collector online is not something that everyone thinks is a good idea. Who are we to demand that they do this? The point is to limit bogus, 'pay back' or frivolous reviews from those who have axes to grind.)

The rules are being upheld, but they are also evolving. Some rules, such as the 'in my opinion' were implemented after some review were in place but we went back and added it to each review. I am sorry that you are finding fault with the site, it is brand new and I am doing the best I can by myself in developing it; please give us a chance to get thing improved. To make matters more difficult my wife just came off the operating table after 7 hours and I am prioritizing time with her over the site. I will get back on the site improvements in the next few days.
Regards
Don

P.S. Bill is teaching at the APS summer seminar this week and will probably not be back online for a few more days.

edit; fixed typo

Don, I know there has been a lot of comments regarding the initial work you and Bill are doing on this project on a couple of other message boards. I think it is a worthwhile endeavor and I'm sure in time that everything will be worked out. I've joined and plan to participate as I can

Don, I tried registering as a member of the site, but the registration bounced back to me.

Here's a copy of the returned mail. The addresses have been changed to protect our privacy




-Brian

Art,
Thank you.

Al E.
Thanks, a review site like this (which is similar to Angie's List or Yelp) is difficult to get up and running. It is more than simply the logistics of building a new site but also the need to 'start somewhere'; it isn't of much value if there are no reviews/data in the database. Although I rolled it out privately for a week or two we really needed to have people join and begin using it to identify what needed improvement.

It is generating considerable interest and feedback is now rolling in. I thank everyone who has shown interest and is offering input. This site is non-commercial and is literally owned by all the members. While there is already over 300,000 lines of code in the site I will do my best to reply to every comment and implement as many of the suggestions as possible.

Brian,
Programmatically generated email are always a pain. Almost all email servers now-a-days use types of heuristic analysis which zero in on whatever it thinks may be spam. I sent you an email and if you reply back to me at my home email I will get you set up right away.
Regards
Don

Looks like an excellent site, once it gets up and running. But for it to really keep bad sellers in check, it has to become very well known among stamp buyers. I don't know how this will happen except word of mouth, like this thread, on many stamp forums. But what about collectors who don't belong to stamp forums?

Is there a way for Stamp Smarter to have a link on all of the most prominent online stamp supply stores?


-IBFS

If the FROM address domain doesn't match the actual sending domain most major systems will kick it back now. We just had to change the code here and on the coin forum.

Used to be here if you sent an email to another member the FROM address was yours. Now its not because of policy changes from the big players, its the forums generic address and the REPLY TO address is yours. They go through.

IBFS,
Yes indeed, we have not yet done any substantial marketing or SEO (search engine optimization) efforts. Like most 'crowd sourcing' sites we expect that is will pick up momentum as time goes by but we will also be doing marketing work. We have not yet added many of the additional educational aspects of the site which will eventually include helpful articles and other resources to help stamp buyer make better decisions. One of these resources will be a links page will help users find additional information and online help (such as this forum).

We are also not ruling out possible associations with other non-profit, education orientated organizations; but much of this is on the 'back burner' until we get more reviews in the database. We may also look into building positions within the Membership group like a local stamp club would and having elections to fill the positions. But now is a good time to get in on the ground floor!
Don

Is Stamp Smarter intended to police sellers on ebay only, or other stamp buying sites as well?


-IBFS

IBFS,
It is designed to support any online listing; if it can be linked it can be added. I have not added the ability to designate the site name but will parse the name out of the link when/if needed to breakdown reviews by site. We can also add the ability (when and if needed) to let users filter on the link. In other words simply typing ' ebay' in the filter for the link would automatically reduce the display to those ebay reviews.
Don

Since the site's mission (according to home page) is education and teaching tool, it would be helpful to the uneducated (me) if the basis for the opinion is provided. I noticed several comments that only stated "the item is fake" without any explanation. My 2 cents and compliments to those doing the work.

MrE - good point.

Perhaps in time, a simple drop down list can be added for common problems/reasons why a stamp is misdescribed - with the comment box attached to that for details.

This will save time for the reporter and could also be educational if each reason has a link to a definition and perhaps some examples.

Eg: Stamp concern = possible reperf - COMMENT: right side looks wrong to me
"click here for a definition of reperf and some examples"

MrE and 3Dadeo,
Agreed, the better the reviewer specifies these kinds of details the higher the educational value. I really debated on how much to 'force' the data entry for a review. Being database kind of guy I always lean towards limiting 'free form' user input and controlling the exact possible choices. (it makes writing queries sooooo much easier!)

Take, for example, adding a sellers name. The 'free form' issue is that if user A enters 'usstamp' and user B enters 'us_stamps' then it looks like two different sellers in the data. I could supply a drop down box and force users to select from a list of existing name in the database. But this then adds extra steps and complexity to the data entry when someone wants to add a seller who is not in the list. It also can make for logistical issues when the list starts getting hundreds of seller name deep; few users want to scroll through long lists to pick one.

But at the very least on my list of things to do is to add better instructions about entering reviews to include more details.
Thanks for the feedback.
Don

Great work so far Don!

To avoid the user name problem, a FAQ that emphasizes how important it is for a reporter to type the user name EXACTLY (for the reasons you stated) may not be a bad idea.

Of course mistakes will happen.

I agree a drop down for user names could become too cumbersome in time.

The list of reasons should not be too long though. Also, there could always be an "other" category.