Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke H
JT,
As always you’ve raised excellent points for discussion and set them out in a beautifully structured way.
I’ve had some really wonderful badges at good prices from members, be they full or part-time dealers, collectors supplementing their income, disposing of spares or friends who kindly gift badges (thanks again JT). I’d hate that to stop. Think we all agree getting something we’re after is often difficult so if the forum offers the potential of something popping up I’m all for it.
For me at least the question ‘what’s our the definition of a dealer?’ is a relevant one. A lot of collectors are dealers and vice versa. Clearly if it’s you’re bread & butter and how you make a living then 100% = dealer. But there seems to be a growing number of regular ‘casual’ sellers who buy a few badges to sell on the side, nothing wrong with that but at that point IMO it starts descending into a greyscale spectrum.
I’m always happy for reference albums to be up, they can be a useful tool when deciding on a badge. As for advertising websites/auctions, it doesn’t bother me... they’re like adverts on the tube.
I take Andy’s point re asking about a badge only to sell it elsewhere. However there’s a certain dichotomy to the situation, we all (myself included) are often the first to criticise when a dealer misdescribes an item - through ignorance or otherwise. Part of me feels like they’re damed if they do ask and sell, damed if they don’t and get it wrong. We can’t have it both ways.
As for bans, if you’re a member actively and knowingly selling fakes as originals you should be banned as that’s fraud. However I do realise the futility of bans, there’s nothing to stop a banned member creating another email address and BBF account.
Personally I think there’s a good peer review system and community spirit on here amongst collectors. Dealers/sellers have been challenged by members when selling fakes or spurious items and action taken. Members actively warn other members of fakes etc. too. So I think our self-policing model, for want of a better phrase, whilst not perfect is mostly good and works.
All just my opinion of course.
Cheers,
Luke
|
Luke,
It seems to be the case that as long as each seller's modi operandi are within the bounds of forum etiquette there is no cause for alarm. As you say, anybody attempting to slip though the net (intentionally or otherwise) will be picked up somewhere along the line. Though some seem to be of the opinion that there are those who enjoy 'diplomatic immunity' and get away unchecked, with perennially bending the rules.
Agreed, we are all seeking to multiply our collections. That grey area you allude to should, theoretically, be well and truly covered by the 'declaration' protocol (sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel
). If you're a fulltime dealer, it covers you, and if you're a casual seller, it covers you too.
But clearly there are issues with this for some. People are (for want of a better word) offended by what they see as the forum and its members being used purely to advance sellers' profiles and profits for minimal returns.
Jerry makes an excellent point when he says:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBBOND
I know it is frowned upon when people join just to get id/vetting before selling elsewhere and perhaps if the member in question listed items for sale here, then that would be another matter and also as a collector community, I like to see members contribute with knowledge where they can...'
|
And is Phil right or wrong when he says the following:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil2M
'Is robin and his auction any different to MCC and his fairs?
He profits from the entry tickets and stalls out, (I assume) does he not? He must have knowledge but he doesn't post it.
Not an attack on Mark, I have no problem with him advertising his fairs. Just using him to illustrate a point..
|
JT
08-03-19, 04:59 PM
Linear Mode
