To me, the card has no appearance of being a Valentine, nor intended to be a Valentine by the date or the message. Good to see both sides, but they draw a blank for me.
To weave some tangential fabric about Bays, WV... from the 1911 "Official Register of the United States", vol 2, the listing of WV postal employees and their compensations, Bays is near the bottom end of the pay scale:
Carriers were making $800-1200 annually, which points to the PM doing this as a side job.
Tangent 2, date-stamp documentation procedures, I believe the postmasters and clerks were generally very careful as they were required to record the setting of the slugs in the cancel with each change. From the 1902 Postal Laws and Regulations (similar text was in the 1913 PL&R which was the next bound compilation volume):
Overall, it seems odd that a small WV village would get a supply of a new stamp nearly a week before it is recorded used anywhere else. Also the lack of a corroborating dated message or receiving mark makes it problematic. I would lean toward this being a 1913 use with the inverted JAN intentionally indicating non-receipt of the new year 1913 date. Perhaps someone can shed light on the official printing/delivery/shipment records of this stamp to help support or refute? A fun mystery!