Speaking Of Reperfs ...

I thought "everyone" was in titled to an opinion here. Remember not everyone here is an "expert" collector. Some are beginners and just want to learn. So how can they do that when a few anal retents try to character assassinate someone for personal reasons over a response they made. Bottom line it really needs to stop. If that isn't possible than "leave" the forum and find another that makes you happy.
Mr Weiss, feel free to comment whenever and on whatever topic you care to. I, like many others value and appreciate your contributions and welcome your comments.
Thank you,
Michael

Hi Wert,

I still don't know what you mean by a "hard time"? Do you mean has anyone ever disagreed with an opinion I wrote? Of course. That happens ocassionally where one expert service may not fully describe a stamp exactly as another expert service has. Early coils are a particularly contentious area. Sometimes expert services disagree on reperfing.

Or do you mean something different? No, your question does not sound negative, but I'm still unsure exactly what you are asking? But I will be happy to try to answer as best I can once I do understand!

I hear ya, Pat. Geez, I'm sorry I ever started this thread. I'll think twice before starting another.

Bill..You did answer my question..Thanks

Robert

Clark (or anyone interested),
Could you point us to that policy on "keyword spamming." I am not familiar with it and would like to see what it says. There is a question mark in this case, inasmuch as the seller can claim that they did not reference the name of the Weiss Expertizing service, but rather Bill Weiss personally. I would think that ebay might have a policy against use of personal names in a lot title, but I don't know if they do.


However it reads, your point is of interest, I think, also because it calls attention to something that plugs into a trend I've been seeing at ebay. There seems to be a growing number of sellers for whom a title and an image are all the description that will be given. We see it with some very big stamp sellers such as billsbargainstamps, nystamps, ckstamps, and now this and other sellers, especially those challenged in the writing of English. If that trend continues, then you can expect ebay, which typically tries to make things "easy" for its sellers as well as buyers, to change some of the rules to conform to the trend. Which rules, and how they conform, remains to be seen.

Need I say that the onus of that change goes against the grain for those who are complaining about buyer safeguards on ebay. Nonetheless, as a convenience for sellers, we can expect ebay to be very accommodating to what we might call "abbreviated listings


Edit: a bit of immediate follow-up.
The concept of "keyword spamming" appears to be something other than what Clark reported. Here is a definition typical of what I am turning up in searches:




Not just in titles but in descriptions too, when other objects or products are mentioned by name, that moves into the realm of keyword spamming. If this seller had named a service, that might be considered keyword spamming since the service is a saleable item. To merely mention the name or cite a quotation by an expert does not appear to qualify. Still looking into it.

I agree essayk

You must not be aware of the fact that up to a few years ago sellers *WERE* required to provide written descriptions. But then the policy was suddenly changed and the new (current) policy was instituted whereby clear pictures were considered a "complete" description.

I (and others) argued this new policy multiple times with ebay and we were even successful in getting APS to write ebay a formal letter asking them to reconsider and change the policy. ebay did not even acknowledge the letter from APS! I can easily provide copies of that letter by APS and other letters (from myself) to ebay arguing against this policy in a different thread if anybody wants to see them?

So you are 100% incorrect if you think ebay is going to go the other way! Indeed, this "pictures only" policy has been a windfall for the bigger sellers because it enables them to put up a lot of questionable stuff (in terms of undisclosed faults) and no seller has benefited more than nystamps has. That seller consistently has the most items with undisclosed faults than any ebay Stamps Category seller IMO and a quick check of the Stamp Smarter site (where you can search for results in multiple ways including by seller name) will reveal the great number of reports made against them for undisclosed faults.

And BTW, ebay's stated reason was that they needed to have the Pictures Only policy be site-wide so would not consider allowing the Stamps Catagory to be "exempt".

Please do not misrepresent the nature of my objection. It is not about your "right" to do anything. Rather it is this: this topic has appeared repeatedly, and, independent of me, has caused a bit of a furor on the list. By its nature it is not something the list can resolve, and since it tends to be unsettling, it is not the sort of thing that should be seen often. People who need to know what has been said before can be pointed to previous threads without going through it all again.

The topic of this forum is about US classic stamps, not per se about the sale of stamps on ebay. Occasional overlap would hardly be a problem and could be expected, but intentional redundancy "for the greater good," especially on contentious subjects which have divided the group before, does not seem either appropriate nor healthy for this forum.

Beyond this, let me also add that compromising my right to privacy is not a legitimate way to build your case or demonstrate your integrity.

First of all, lots of threads here are redundant. How many times must it be explained (for example) why a poster does NOT own a #596? Or, take a post just put up by "disi" where he showed us a #131 that the Cartel has sold multiple times. We've been over how those sellers do that, but I don't see you trying to stop these theads?

Further, unethical, fraudulent or otherwise problematic selling on online sites **IS** an important stamp-related subject. And last, what gives you the right to be the "thread police"? Topics that are devisive are actually GOOD for a forum such as this which presents a nicely diverse cross-section of philatelic and related topics. Why you choose to rale against this one is perplexing.....

Next, by my count, not one other poster in this thread has agreed with you.

Last, I would counter your complaint about MY integrity by pointing out that you waive this "right" by being 100% revealing in other forums, so it's hardly the world's best kept secret anyway, so I dont feel as if I'm sharing something which you don't already freely also share. Yet I won't question your integrity by doing so.