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

[cheetah]

Where's the choice that the seller should answer honestly if asked by a potential buyer? I've always done that, though very few ever ask.

[fantastic_four]

Where's the choice that the seller should answer honestly if asked by a potential buyer? I've always done that, though very few ever ask.

 

That's reactive, not proactive.

[VintageComics]

Where's the choice that the seller should answer honestly if asked by a potential buyer? I've always done that, though very few ever ask.

 

That's reactive, not proactive.

 

Um, it is proactive on the part of the buyer.

 

[cheetah]

Where's the choice that the seller should answer honestly if asked by a potential buyer? I've always done that, though very few ever ask.

 

That's reactive, not proactive.

 

Just because the Pied Piper leads the rats down one trail doesn't mean their aren't other trails to follow.

[skypinkblu]

I think we did see that the majority of the people want the sellers in the market place to SPILL whatever information they have honestly.

 

My problem with Nick's questions are as follows...

 

 

(1) Request that Arch includes pro-active disclosure in the Marketplace rules with the standard actions/sanctions being the consequence of non-adherence.

Who is going to decide the consequences, or that someone violated the rules? It’s not the same as the probation thread where someone does something concrete. He/She pays or does not pay or does not send an item.

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

I’m sorry but the way this option is worded would just encourage fights in the threads. Some of us do have a problem with with chain of custody with books that we bought in the past.

 

For these last two, who picks who goes on the list? How does someone get off the list, this is going to provide yards and yards of dissention.

(3) The maintenance of a 'Disclosers' list, highlighting those sellers who actively disclose in all of their sales thread.

 

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

 

I would suggest a rule or SUGGESTION be added to the marketplace, stating that sellers are encouraged to give as much information as they know about pressing or restoration. It's open, doesn't make someone who is unsure a pariah and it gives those who need freedom of expression some leeway in personal choice as to how they present information..

[NewWorldOrder]

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?"

 

 

Roy we agree twice in a month.

[Transplant]

I think we did see that the majority of the people want the sellers in the market place to SPILL whatever information they have honestly.

 

My problem with Nick's questions are as follows...

 

 

(1) Request that Arch includes pro-active disclosure in the Marketplace rules with the standard actions/sanctions being the consequence of non-adherence.

Who is going to decide the consequences, or that someone violated the rules? It’s not the same as the probation thread where someone does something concrete. He/She pays or does not pay or does not send an item.

Same as the other rules. Arch can delete the thread.

(2) No inclusion in the rules, but the acceptance of one post being allowed per sales thread, requesting pro-active disclosure. The precise content can be worked out, but something civil and mannerly, along the lines of 'Nice bunch of books! You may be aware that the community here is in favour of pro-active disclosure of pressing and with this in mind, could you identify which books you know have been pressed? Thanks!'

I’m sorry but the way this option is worded would just encourage fights in the threads. Some of us do have a problem with with chain of custody with books that we bought in the past. Again. It would be close to a rule. 1 post in the thread, but no power to shut it down if not done.

 

[Transplant]

Roy we agree twice in a month.

Roy shill.

[Davenport]

I would suggest a rule or SUGGESTION be added to the marketplace, stating that sellers are encouraged to give as much information as they know about pressing or restoration. It's open, doesn't make someone who is unsure a pariah and it gives those who need freedom of expression some leeway in personal choice as to how they present information..

On the 1st page I suggested a Marketplace Guideline could be added as a community standard, but it got no response...

"Please note: Proactive disclosure is a marketplace community standard. Consider your buyers have asked for full disclosure by shopping here."

 

A guideline leaves personal choice, but makes it known this is a specific community marketplace with preferred standards.

 

 

[DrWatson]

Mandatory disclosure negates personal choice.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Looks like eBay and comic link will be the place to buy books now, the market forums are about to go to mess

 

Thanks Nick

 

[NewWorldOrder]

Or how many have even ever purchased, sold or even have a valid interest in the marketplace. Of course, I'm sure we will be told that it isn't relevant.

 

I agree.

 

That's why everyone that makes a vote should also make a post in the respective thread regarding their reasoning for their vote. Anything short of that is not representative of a community, it's just an anonymous poll.

 

You realize true democracies use anonymous voting right? Is that not what they do in Canada?

The boards are not a democracy.

 

Correct, that is stonecold fact.

 

CGC Boards is NOT a place of total free speech and opinions.

 

Trust me.

[G.A.tor]

Or how many have even ever purchased, sold or even have a valid interest in the marketplace. Of course, I'm sure we will be told that it isn't relevant.

 

I agree.

 

That's why everyone that makes a vote should also make a post in the respective thread regarding their reasoning for their vote. Anything short of that is not representative of a community, it's just an anonymous poll.

 

You realize true democracies use anonymous voting right? Is that not what they do in Canada?

The boards are not a democracy.

 

Correct, that is stonecold fact.

 

CGC Boards is NOT a place of total free speech and opinions.

 

Trust me.

and why would we trust you

[DrWatson]

Or how many have even ever purchased, sold or even have a valid interest in the marketplace. Of course, I'm sure we will be told that it isn't relevant.

 

I agree.

 

That's why everyone that makes a vote should also make a post in the respective thread regarding their reasoning for their vote. Anything short of that is not representative of a community, it's just an anonymous poll.

 

You realize true democracies use anonymous voting right? Is that not what they do in Canada?

The boards are not a democracy.

 

Correct, that is stonecold fact.

 

CGC Boards is NOT a place of total free speech and opinions.

 

Trust me.

How can I trust you? You have books pressed. Trust should be mandatory. Let's put it in the selling guidelines. "Thou Shalt Trust Thy Fellow Board Member."

[G.A.tor]

Or how many have even ever purchased, sold or even have a valid interest in the marketplace. Of course, I'm sure we will be told that it isn't relevant.

 

I agree.

 

That's why everyone that makes a vote should also make a post in the respective thread regarding their reasoning for their vote. Anything short of that is not representative of a community, it's just an anonymous poll.

 

You realize true democracies use anonymous voting right? Is that not what they do in Canada?

The boards are not a democracy.

 

Correct, that is stonecold fact.

 

CGC Boards is NOT a place of total free speech and opinions.

 

Trust me.

How can I trust you? You have books pressed. Trust should be mandatory. Let's put it in the selling guidelines. "Thou Shalt Trust Thy Fellow Board Member."

trust...earned, right

[Davenport]

Mandatory disclosure negates personal choice.

Where are you getting "mandatory"?

A guideline is suggested and preferred, but not mandatory. Right?

[FlyingDonut]

Mandatory disclosure negates personal choice.

Where are you getting "mandatory"?

A guideline is suggested and preferred, but not mandatory. Right?

 

From the only four options given in this poll.

[DrWatson]

Mandatory disclosure negates personal choice.

Where are you getting "mandatory"?

A guideline is suggested and preferred, but not mandatory. Right?

I don't know. There have been some fuzzy semantics lately.

[seanfingh]

Mandatory disclosure negates personal choice.

Personal choices have been abrogated all over the place in the Marketplace. No selling PGX - No selling without scan or grade, no selling by soliciting bids.

 

You are doing nothing but hurling red herrings. I respect your opinion and your right to express yourself. I would be more likely to pay attention if you were actually saying something that meant something.

[Bomber-Bob]

Looks like eBay and comic link will be the place to buy books now, the market forums are about to go to mess

 

Thanks Nick

 

 

Flaming_Telepath, FYI, I applaud what you are doing here. Don't let the naysayers discourage you. There is nothing wrong with active diclosure. When asking about pressing (I often ask) I also like to know WHO did the press. I definitely don't want

to buy someone else's mistake. I have received a couple fugly looking presses and I want to avoid them. It's always nice to know the history and heritage of a book when possible. I consider pressing to be part of that history.