How Do We Achieve Pro-Active Disclosure In The Marketplace?

[Flaming_Telepath]

Should you do this you are now restricting the sales threads to those who press and actively disclose and those who do not press and can vouch for the book.

 

What happens to those who do not press and do not know if a book is pressed? What do they disclose? Are they now suspect simply because they do not have an answer?

 

We all saw what happened to Steve B's sales thread when he said the books "may or may not have been pressed".

 

 

If you know, you say.

 

If you don't know, you say you don't know.

 

Ok....so I don't know. Suspicion is now levied against me for simply not knowing. The question of pressing has been deliberately inserted into my sales thread. This is completely aside from the fact that I am innocent in all ways since I truly have no idea if the book has been pressed. I am now guilty from merely having the term associated with the books in my thread. Its a level of suspicion that is not warranted except to appease those who feel pressing is restoration.

 

I have always said I dont believe pressing is restoration nor do I care about pressing.

 

Its a backhanded way to push the anti presser agenda in the marketplace.

 

You guys do what you want to do but I have a bad feeling about this.

 

Not correct.

 

If you run a sales thread, you simply state in your opening text...'To the best of my knowledge, none of these books have been pressed'...or similar wording.

 

No hassle, no suspicion levelled.

[seanfingh]

Should you do this you are now restricting the sales threads to those who press and actively disclose and those who do not press and can vouch for the book.

 

What happens to those who do not press and do not know if a book is pressed? What do they disclose? Are they now suspect simply because they do not have an answer?

 

We all saw what happened to Steve B's sales thread when he said the books "may or may not have been pressed".

 

 

If you know, you say.

 

If you don't know, you say you don't know.

 

Ok....so I don't know. Suspicion is now levied against me for simply not knowing. The question of pressing has been deliberately inserted into my sales thread. This is completely aside from the fact that I am innocent in all ways since I truly have no idea if the book has been pressed. I am now guilty from merely having the term associated with the books in my thread. Its a level of suspicion that is not warranted except to appease those who feel pressing is restoration.

 

I have always said I dont believe pressing is restoration nor do I care about pressing.

 

Its a backhanded way to push the anti presser agenda in the marketplace.

 

You guys do what you want to do but I have a bad feeling about this.

 

Not correct.

 

If you run a sales thread, you simply state in your opening text...'To the best of my knowledge, none of these books have been pressed'...or similar wording.

 

No hassle, no suspicion levelled.

 

It really is that simple. Just tell whatever you know.

[VintageComics]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Or you could say what we used to say about every poll: "How many votes were by shills?"

 

[GACollectibles]

OK, we're done with the question of whether we want it...the results are unarguable

 

Where was this?

[VintageComics]

OK, we're done with the question of whether we want it...the results are unarguable

 

Where was this?

 

See my post just above yours.

 

[seanfingh]

OK, we're done with the question of whether we want it...the results are unarguable

 

Where was this?

 

See my post just above yours.

 

 

1st post of the Disclosure Yes or No Thread.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Or you could say what we used to say about every poll: "How many votes were by shills?"

 

 

I would say an equal proportion per choice.

 

Or are you saying that shills are more likely to be pro disclosure?

[GACollectibles]

OK, we're done with the question of whether we want it...the results are unarguable

 

Where was this?

 

See my post just above yours.

 

 

1st post of the Disclosure Yes or No Thread.

 

Ah, that would explain it. There was no indication in the title that thread was regarding marketplace transactions, so I never read it.

[Mr. Zipper]

Ok....so I don't know. Suspicion is now levied against me for simply not knowing. The question of pressing has been deliberately inserted into my sales thread. This is completely aside from the fact that I am innocent in all ways since I truly have no idea if the book has been pressed. I am now guilty from merely having the term associated with the books in my thread. Its a level of suspicion that is not warranted except to appease those who feel pressing is restoration.

 

I have always said I dont believe pressing is restoration nor do I care about pressing.

 

Its a backhanded way to push the anti presser agenda in the marketplace.

 

You guys do what you want to do but I have a bad feeling about this.

 

I think you are reading way too much into this. If you don't know, you don't know. I would imagine that is the case the vast majority of the time, and it certainly doesn't make you "suspicious."

 

The only people who truly know are people who have had the book pressed (or know it was pressed), and people who bought from a reliable original source who know it has not been pressed. Everyone else falls in-between. (You can make an educated guess based on the condition and value of a book, but that is another discussion.)

[VintageComics]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Or you could say what we used to say about every poll: "How many votes were by shills?"

 

 

I would say an equal proportion per choice.

 

Or are you saying that shills are more likely to be pro disclosure?

 

I guess it would depend on which side was more heated about the issue.

 

 

I do agree that there is a pretty impressive difference between the two though, this time 'round.

 

(thumbs u

[EastEnd]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Ouch, so you're giving those people no voice?

 

Seems to me you just add up the other four choices and compare that total to the "Do nothing" total. If you're previous poll is accurate, I'd expect roughly 75% of respondents to choose something other than "do nothing"... it would be very tough for a "do-nothinger" to win an argument that the community decided to do nothing.

 

If you did add a "Do nothing" category though, you would have to limit the choice to only one as otherwise the "do nothing" choice would always be split.

 

Not trying to over-complicate things for you -- I appreciate your tenacity -- but this poll becomes suspect I think if you don't give the opposing view a voice.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Or you could say what we used to say about every poll: "How many votes were by shills?"

 

 

I would say an equal proportion per choice.

 

Or are you saying that shills are more likely to be pro disclosure?

 

I guess it would depend on which side was more heated about the issue.

 

 

I do agree that there is a pretty impressive difference between the two though, this time 'round.

 

(thumbs u

 

What was also shocking was the level of respondents. Over 260 people had their say, which was 100+ more than any other previous poll.

[Flaming_Telepath]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Ouch, so you're giving those people no voice?

 

Seems to me you just add up the other four choices and compare that total to the "Do nothing" total. If you're previous poll is accurate, I'd expect roughly 75% of respondents to choose something other than "do nothing"... it would be very tough for a "do-nothinger" to win an argument that the community decided to do nothing.

 

If you did add a "Do nothing" category though, you would have to limit the choice to only one as otherwise the "do nothing" choice would always be split.

 

Not trying to over-complicate things for you -- I appreciate your tenacity -- but this poll becomes suspect I think if you don't give the opposing view a voice.

 

Well, the 'opposition' had their voice and at only 27% of the vote, it's clear that something needs to be done. And they even get to chose which choice is least offensive to them.

 

Seriously, the community voice is clear that the issue has to be addressed. To include 'do nothing' is to take the process back a peg.

[Jeffro.]

(4) The maintenance of a 'Non-Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who make no effort to pro-actively disclose in their sales thread.

 

That's a very NOD-like concept.

 

Very much against this idea.

[DiceX]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Ouch, so you're giving those people no voice?

 

Seems to me you just add up the other four choices and compare that total to the "Do nothing" total. If you're previous poll is accurate, I'd expect roughly 75% of respondents to choose something other than "do nothing"... it would be very tough for a "do-nothinger" to win an argument that the community decided to do nothing.

 

If you did add a "Do nothing" category though, you would have to limit the choice to only one as otherwise the "do nothing" choice would always be split.

 

Not trying to over-complicate things for you -- I appreciate your tenacity -- but this poll becomes suspect I think if you don't give the opposing view a voice.

 

Well, the 'opposition' had their voice and at only 27% of the vote, it's clear that something needs to be done. And they even get to chose which choice is least offensive to them.

 

Seriously, the community voice is clear that the issue has to be addressed. To include 'do nothing' is to take the process back a peg.

 

Something might need to be done, but what if it's not in your agenda driven list in your poll?

 

I'm not picking a side here, but the way you're going about this seems like vigilante justice, and some people don't like being pushed if they agree with where they're being pushed or not.

 

 

[Jeffro.]

Should you do this you are now restricting the sales threads to those who press and actively disclose and those who do not press and can vouch for the book.

 

What happens to those who do not press and do not know if a book is pressed? What do they disclose? Are they now suspect simply because they do not have an answer?

 

We all saw what happened to Steve B's sales thread when he said the books "may or may not have been pressed".

 

 

If you know, you say.

 

If you don't know, you say you don't know.

 

Ok....so I don't know. Suspicion is now levied against me for simply not knowing. The question of pressing has been deliberately inserted into my sales thread. This is completely aside from the fact that I am innocent in all ways since I truly have no idea if the book has been pressed. I am now guilty from merely having the term associated with the books in my thread. Its a level of suspicion that is not warranted except to appease those who feel pressing is restoration.

 

I have always said I dont believe pressing is restoration nor do I care about pressing.

 

Its a backhanded way to push the anti presser agenda in the marketplace.

 

You guys do what you want to do but I have a bad feeling about this.

 

I, for one, share your concerns.

[nearmint]

I think much of "the opposition" has moved on from the pressing issue. This is the first pressing thread that I've posted in, or even read, in quite some time. I think the same is true for many others, which would explain why your poll skewed differently than it has in the past.

 

As someone who doesn't care about pressing, I fear that the creation of any list might scare some sellers away from the marketplace. I'd hate to miss out on some great books because a seller feels that there's a movement against pressing here that doesn't exist on the consignment sites.

 

And that's how some sellers will see it. Not as a movement that's for disclosure, but a movement against pressing. Exactly what happened to NOD.

[GACollectibles]

I dunno Nick, I'm not saying the results wouldn't be the same but the thread could have at least been titled to represent what it was about. It appeared to be a general Disclosure opinion thread, not a solicitation for Marketplace standards poll. I didn't read it as I thought it was a general discussion, I absolutely have interest in what happens in the Marketplace, and would continue to do what I currently do, disclose pressing when I know it to be there.

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Or you could say what we used to say about every poll: "How many votes were by shills?"

 

 

I would say an equal proportion per choice.

 

Or are you saying that shills are more likely to be pro disclosure?

 

I guess it would depend on which side was more heated about the issue.

 

 

I do agree that there is a pretty impressive difference between the two though, this time 'round.

 

(thumbs u

 

What was also shocking was the level of respondents. Over 260 people had their say, which was 100+ more than any other previous poll.

 

I wonder how many of those 260 votes were by IDs with 10 posts or less.

 

Guess we'll never know.

[DrWatson]

I voted for options 2 and 3... but to be fair here to those that oppose pro-active disclosure, there really should be a fifth option that says "Don't change anything."

 

That would receive the highest number of votes, as the entire anti-disclosure 'camp' would vote for that, whereas the pro-disclosure camp would be spilt over four choices.

 

Ouch, so you're giving those people no voice?

 

Seems to me you just add up the other four choices and compare that total to the "Do nothing" total. If you're previous poll is accurate, I'd expect roughly 75% of respondents to choose something other than "do nothing"... it would be very tough for a "do-nothinger" to win an argument that the community decided to do nothing.

 

If you did add a "Do nothing" category though, you would have to limit the choice to only one as otherwise the "do nothing" choice would always be split.

 

Not trying to over-complicate things for you -- I appreciate your tenacity -- but this poll becomes suspect I think if you don't give the opposing view a voice.

 

Well, the 'opposition' had their voice and at only 27% of the vote, it's clear that something needs to be done. And they even get to chose which choice is least offensive to them.

 

Seriously, the community voice is clear that the issue has to be addressed. To include 'do nothing' is to take the process back a peg.

 

Something might need to be done, but what if it's not in your agenda driven list in your poll?

 

I'm not picking a side here, but the way you're going about this seems like vigilante justice, and some people don't like being pushed if they agree with where they're being pushed or not.

Exactly X 2.