Stamp Smarter

You guys can say what you like because it is just a rehash of what has already been said. I am just not interested in reading the same thing over and over including the position I have in all this.

You support the topic or not.

I have very simply stated my position very clearly so why should I read and write a heap of what I do not want to hear.......finished for me!

If you people are not finished, keep writing and reading!

"Supporting new ideas, and giving them chance of succeeding before passing judgments, not only goes a long way in keeping our hobby vibrant and thriving but proves that we have many people who care about its future.";

Funny, but in the May, 2014 issue of American Stamp Dealer and Collector, longtime writer John Dunn wrote a thought-provoking article "Tradition - Good or Bad?" and in it, he suggests that organizations (and by extension, it's people) need to "pay attention to activists who push for change" or another term for them is "disruptors", he says. In the stamp industry he says, "disruptors" are not looked upon with favor, as most folks apparently prefer to hang onto what they regard as "tradition", and they resist change.

I am personally of an age where I can relate to that! It is a proven and widely-observed fact that as most folks age, they resist change. It is a shame that so many folks feel that any change is bad. I echo Don's last post 100%. See us six months from now and if you still feel the site is not useful, we'll listen attentively. Until then, please give it a chance.

And again, please help. Tonight I spotted what I believe is a LOT of fake First issue part perf revenues, so it would be nice if those who are more expert in revenues (you know who you are.....:>)!) would pitch in and do some reporting. Just in the listings of two sellers (nystamps and pimpernel) there must be 20+ fake first issue part perfs, but I would feel a lot better if all of them aren't reported by me, so how about a hand?

51, I just went and applied for a membership. Im looking forward seeing what all the noise is about.

I assume this is directed at Bart and/or myself. I went to start taking a look, and realized that this gets a little sticky, at least with respect to contacting the sellers in question... an aspect I hadn't anticipated.

I'm still active in both buying and selling this material. Some sellers create alternate buying IDs on ebay, something I have not done. So I would be contacting them through my primary userID.

1. From a buyer's perspective this potentially means getting blocked. Many sellers do not like dealing with prospective buyers who critique their listings.

2. More importantly, as a seller who alse sells this material, contact like this could be construed as anticompetitive and interference, and could get me booted from ebay.

I can set up a new userID to use with Stamp Smarter, but of course it will have no ties to my experience, and no one will take a zero-feedback account seriously.

Or I can just make reports and someone else could actually contact the seller.

Hrmmm....

Currently we have no requirement to contact the sellers but obviously we encourage it, it is a important part of the concept.

That said, we help each other as much as we can. In other words, if a person doesn't know how to do a screen capture they can simply submit a Review and one of the other members can add the screen capture for them.

The same is true for contacting a seller. If you submit a Review but do not contact the seller, one of us will do it for you if time allows. (Keep in mind that this isn't likely to happen if the Review is for something with only a few hours left before it goes to hammer.)

It is even possible to multiple people to contact the seller and ask for clarification or improvement in a listing. (Heck, they don't even have to be a member to do this. I had a non-member let me know that he had read a Review and submitted a question to the seller based upon it.)

But please note even if a Review doesn't drive a seller contact there is still some value to the review, just not nearly as much as providing the opportunity for a listing improvement.

Don

I really like the whole concept, and am really interested in seeing where it goes. I only recently created an alternate ID on ebay and as Rev pointed out... Zero feedback. I created it so I could see my listings as a customer would.
I would certainly think it to be horrible to get blocked just because I had an opinion, but I simpithize with the Rev.
I didn't know you could get booted from ebay for making an Alt account!?!?

I would start by trying to get the local resident coinwatcher to remove his silly listings. Only time will tell on the success of the site, but that being said that also means you can't condemn it until it's been running for bit.

Having idiotic price expectations is not the same as fraud. IMO, the majority of his listings would not fall under the purview of StampSmarter.

This topic migrated so far away from my original inquiry I almost need a reminder of subject. Thank you to Don for posting a privacy policy. I have reviewed it, and I get it that my personal information is not let out unless I authorize it. But I am still not clear about a liability matter, which came to mind as I saw how some people are inclined to construe/misconstrue the existence of a group like Smart Stamper. Do you have a disclaimer that shields reviewers from the punitive actions of others who wish to harm/challenge the organization? In particular, if a seller wishes to sue the group for a perceived harm to his/her business, do I as a rostered member assume a portion of liability by virtue of being a rostered member? What shields me from that? What shields me from any retaliatory action by someone who wishes to make a case in court that they have sustained damages as a result of the group's activity?

Essayk,

Short answer:
According to my lawyer both parties (site owners and posters) have the same responsibilities as any other publication (magazine letters to the editor, for example). The Stamp Smarter has to do its due diligence to prevent people from slandering others. This means rules, removal of slanderous or libelous comments, removal of a person's right to post comments, etc.

But you are absolutely correct that each poster also has responsibility for not making slanderous or libelous comments. In fact, in cases involving other review sites like Angie's List have had court cases where posters were held responsible for making slanderous comments. But the exact same thing holds true for ANY publication, including this forum. You simply can't break the law when posting by using racial remarks or stating something as factual when it is really just your opinion.

Longer answer:
There is one interesting US case that last year held a forum responsible for comments made by one of the users of the forum. But this was a very controversial ruling and is now in a court of appeals. (It is looking very much like first decision will be overruled. I actually posted a thread on this ruling about last month but for whatever reason it was removed from this forum. IF this case is not over ruled by the court of appeals it could have an incredible chilling effect on all US forums since forum site owners would then have much more legal exposure.) But it is highly unlikely that members of a forum/site would be held responsible for everyone else's reviews, comments, or even behaviors. That would hold for this forum and every other web site, club or organization like this one. It would also be the same for a site like the Frajola site.

But note that obviously anyone can sue anyone else if they are really motivated. So the first, and most important, line of defense is to never make comments that are slanderous or can be considered libel. The objective of the site, and purpose for reviewing listings, is educational and to try to improve the quality of online philatelic transactions. I do not see how questioning another person's motives, hurling accusations, or allowing anyone to use inflammatory language towards anyone else has anything to do with our mission.

I will not allow anyone to be critical of a seller or anyone else; frankly this is far more restrictive and focused than most forums. I review, and reserve the right, to modified anyone's Review; I don't care who you are or how much you contribute. Too many people have already invested too much in this project to allow it to be impacted by stupid mistakes and allowing anyone to post Reviews that are questionable or are 'walking a fine line'. In other words, the default will be towards censoring anything that comes close to straying away from a opinioned review of a listing for education and improvement purposes.

I would like to add that we could have set this up in Kathmandu or some other legally out-of-reach place. (My career required that I became familiar with the seedy underbelly of the internet.) We could have remained well under any legal radar and been a rouge 'listing police' (as one derogatory comment put it towards us) with the purpose of exposing the worse sellers. But Stamp Smarter is not about that no matter what the pundits say. Bill and I have remained transparent and well on the radar while we fight the original misconceptions that were propagated. I take responsibility for some of those misconceptions, the first drafts of the site should have been better and I should not have assumed that folks would cut us some slack on that level. I thought we could evolve it; if I had to do it over again I would have put the site up privately for the first few months and only use a handful of people for feedback.

I hope this answers your questions and that you decide to join us in our efforts to help philately. Every user who comes on the site and learns a bit more on how to make informed decisions is another potential long term hobbyist to keep our hobby growing and thriving. Every single listings that gets improved is another small victory in preventing extra costs, bad feelings, and frustrations with our hobby.
Don

I agree with revenuecollector. Stamp Smarter is not about punishing a seller by pressuring them to remove their listings; especially for something like putting a big number on a listing. This is why rather than do that I went ahead and spent time trying to work with CoinWatcher in this forum on improving his listings. (I would note there is one Review of his $1.5M listing on Stamp Smarter but it also notes that he removed the listing.)

For whatever reasons folks seem to want to consider Stamp Smarter with a 'glass half empty' perspective. Truth is that a seller can come off looking very good if they are interested if they simply follow the rules that most online auction site have about responding to questions.

For example ebay rules, and its contact system, has this very purpose. Allowing users to query sellers about their listing for clarification or to clear up any misunderstandings before a sale takes place.

When I contact a seller my message looks something like this;

Good Day,
I was wondering if you would be kind enough to revisit and consider improving your listing #12345667890? The description does not seem to fit the stamp for the following reasons; yadda yadda yadda and yadda yadda yadda.
As I am sure you know the cost of returns and frustrated customers can be significant; clarifying this listing would go a long way towards ensuring a good transaction for all parties.
Thank you in advance,

If this is threatening to any seller I am clueless as to why. He can ignore it and frankly f this is the only review in the database for his listings it is practically meaningless. If he responds professionally, in almost any way, he 'looks good'.

Any way a seller can come off looking 'bad'? Yes, if a trend appears over time, with users forming their own opinions, based upon the data points. No one has to say 'seller xyz might not be a good choice to buy from' if the data shows that the seller has 600 requests for improvement of their listings and he doesn't care or bother to change anything.
Don

I was more looking at it from the angle of description. There are many dreamy sellers on ebay that ask outrageous prices for things that will never sell. What is the difference if someone lists a Scott 150 when it's really a #160 (Just used mythical catalog numbers) VS a seller who labels things as "Very rare", "one of a kind", etc. I haven't visited the site yet but I will soon so I'm not 100% sure of it's direction and what the finish line is for the site.

The first is a factual inaccuracy or deception. The second is a subjective opinion.

Pretty clear difference to me.

While I do agree with your definition the problem lies in the buyer who assumes the later is factual.

Stamp Smarter is focused on helping hobbyists make informed philatelic buying decisions. The database and web design are intended to keep the focus on philatelic the content and is not really designed to also encompass general listing practices. There are literally books written on how to buy and sell on ebay and other online auction venues.
Don