Trade Participation on Pricescope

[risingsun]

But I do have a question for you as you have been here a long time:

To attract the the strong educating kind of trade how does that happen?

(1) Do they have to start on PS that way and were good educators from the beginning?
(2) Are some mostly "self promotional" at the beginning and gradually become better educators as they learn what works best in this community?

It is really about mindset more than anything else.
Someone who is helpful and considerate on the stuff they know while learning the rest will get far.
Those that think they know everything and/or are rude and inconsiderate wont last long at all even if they know a lot more than the helpful and considerate person.

Wink's posted above his experience, he rose to the top quicker than any vendor in PS history and did it based on attitude and relationships and a whole lot of hard work.

That it is mindset goes for pro-sumers and up and coming pro-sumers also.
It takes a lot of work to build trust and relationships no one gets instant "trusted expert" or "trusted pro-sumer" status it has to be earned over time.
A sure way to destroy that status is to be rude and or inconsiderate to consumers.

Bingo.

Thank you for your response to Kaleigh, Karl. Many thanks to Kaleigh for adding to my post. It is interesting and telling that, with the exception of Karl, no one in the trade is paying any attention to the concerns of the consumer. Why would anyone come into this environment, where consumers are ignored and trade people are fighting with each other. I follow all of the trade threads because I want to learn. What I have learned is to stay out of the trade threads. There is more bickering than education going on. Who wants to wade through all of that

 

[Rockdiamond]

Thank you for your response to Kaleigh, Karl. Many thanks to Kaleigh for adding to my post. It is interesting and telling that, with the exception of Karl, no one in the trade is paying any attention to the concerns of the consumer. Why would anyone come into this environment, where consumers are ignored and trade people are fighting with each other. I follow all of the trade threads because I want to learn. What I have learned is to stay out of the trade threads. There is more bickering than education going on. Who wants to wade through all of that

All due respect Marian but there are many different types of consumers, with different concerns and interests.
I think that all the professionals posting here are extremely concerned about consumers.
Part of my point is exactly that different consumers require different types of advice from tradespeople.

 

[Regular Guy]

Thank you for your response to Kaleigh, Karl. Many thanks to Kaleigh for adding to my post. It is interesting and telling that, with the exception of Karl, no one in the trade is paying any attention to the concerns of the consumer. Why would anyone come into this environment, where consumers are ignored and trade people are fighting with each other. I follow all of the trade threads because I want to learn. What I have learned is to stay out of the trade threads. There is more bickering than education going on. Who wants to wade through all of that

All due respect Marian but there are many different types of consumers, with different concerns and interests.
I think that all the professionals posting here are extremely concerned about consumers.
Part of my point is exactly that different consumers require different types of advice from tradespeople.

Marian & David,

I agree and disagree with parts of both of your trains of thoughts. Strategically, functionally, I think Pricescope is supposed to triangulate and fit in where I disagree.

Marian, I was surprised at the thrust of your comment, and can appreciate why David was motivated to reply. I do think tradespeople are who they are because of their care, and I think their efforts are to seek remedy. Also, marginally, sometimes substantively, I agree with you, RD, that it is sometimes not only helpful, but vitally important to throw a wrench in machinery when it is bogged down making holes in doughnuts when people had really come for bialys.

But, I believe in: "G" Unlike Gardner's intelligences...or at least consistent with it...there is a function to science, and data norming to a mean, and where preferences can be understood and finely defined, it makes sense to use tools that man can share with each other to take advantage of common learning. When you insist on black boxes like the expert knowledge narrowly contained in the mind of the expert, you are not taking advantage of the opportunity to share what can be shared, reasonably.

Pricescope, working well, as it has done, has been and can be a place where experience, tools, and knowledge is shared. But, it's also helpful to agree that a "g" exists. If everything is just subjective....not only does the individuation take too long, but it's just not reasonable or functional. Science works because it works. Rejection of same is a waste of time.

If we cannot agree on pursuing science, then I think this provides a rationale and criteria for getting off the bus.

People have only so much patience, and the definition of inclusivity is not as big as including non-inclusivity, really.

Ira Z.

(edited to add...) Andrey, you might even consider ADDING a rule to your list of rules, to wit:

- if Tradesperson, believes in the applicability of science, as it is normatively and conventionally defined, to gemology.

 

[risingsun]

To Ira and RD,
I was referring to this thread and the numerous, contentious threads, which have repeatedly deteriorated into name calling and accusations. I do believe that the trade people want to help us and I have learned a lot from them. I'm frustrated by 10 page threads that go around in circles and trying to pick through the insults to find the knowledge. This and my other posts in this thread were not meant to be an indictment against our helpful trade people. I am asking that they listen to the concerns that a number of us have expressed. Bring us your knowledge without the drama. Let us start to respect each other again. Let us be welcoming community to new vendors. It takes time to understand the PS culture. We should be willing to help new trade people find their way instead of jumping on them. We should offer the same courtesy to any newcomer to this site.

I hope that this better clarifies my POV.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Great post Ira- The application of science ( as defined here on PS) to grade diamonds is controversial- I don't see that changing.
For example, there are machines that can grade the color of diamonds, yet GIA insists on having humans do it.
It could also be said that a repeatable environment for humans to assess grades is scientific in nature, although the grading itself will depend on human judgement.
That translates to my point, which is: science( reflector technology) is one manner of standardizing the viewing environment- however there other methods that may produce equally consistent results.
It might be that Joe Shmoe jeweler, who's very used to his own lighting environment is just as consistent in providing well cut stones as Jane Doe jewelers using aset/IS Brilliancescope Isee2 - what have you.

Therefore, some advice given by those advocating reflector technology will exclude the more traditional methods- and indeed, may contribute to less traditional tradespeople posting.

Marian- this translates also into contention, as some of the regular posters ( posting as consumers) here seem to be bothered by suggesting that the first approach can be as effective for some consumers as the second approach.

To again repeat- I apologize if any comment I have made was seen as insulting or condescending to any reader or participant. From my perspective, by and large, the professionals posting here are all operating in a respectful manner towards each other, and consumers.
Threads can indeed go on for 20 pages- and these in depth discussion may provide a lot of education.
I totally agree that it will be more fun if discussions can take place sans name calling and personal, or professional attacks.

 

[John P]

To Ira and RD,
I was referring to this thread and the numerous, contentious threads, which have repeatedly deteriorated into name calling and accusations. I do believe that the trade people want to help us and I have learned a lot from them. I'm frustrated by 10 page threads that go around in circles and trying to pick through the insults to find the knowledge. This and my other posts in this thread were not meant to be an indictment against our helpful trade people. I am asking that they listen to the concerns that a number of us have expressed. Bring us your knowledge without the drama. Let us start to respect each other again. Let us be welcoming community to new vendors. It takes time to understand the PS culture. We should be willing to help new trade people find their way instead of jumping on them. We should offer the same courtesy to any newcomer to this site.

I hope that this better clarifies my POV.

I think this is valuable perspective.

 

[Lula]

I agree with Ira, and would add that in the past year or so, there seems to be an inordinate amount of tension between the "faith-based" or "trust your eyes" or "traditional jewelry store view" that RD espouses and the science-based view that others espouse. To be honest, the science-based view that PS vendors and prosumers championed was a breath of fresh air during my diamond buying endeavor, and was the primary reason I joined PS and began participating in RT. The infection -- and I do mean "infection"! -- of "faith-based" views into the discussions on RT, and, as Marian mentions, the disrespectful nature of those discussions, is a primary reason that I post less and less on RT.

As a consumer, I have grown to distrust the "faith-based" view of diamond buying, given my many negative experiences with traditional jewelers over the years. I will not return to the "faith-based" method of buying diamonds, although, I will agree that there do seem to be several vendors (both online and B&M) who do not know how to use the new technologies correctly (the debate over ASET images and fancy cuts, and the quality of vendor ASET photos comes to mind). And this lack of knowledge can translate into misleading the consumer (whether overtly or covertly). So, David, I will give you that.

However, the endless discussions about "traditional" vs. "technology" bore me to tears; and, worse, I believe these discussions are not helpful to consumers and reinforce the backward nature of the diamond industry rather than move knowledge forward. I think the consumers have actually done a better job than certain vendors have in respecting the varied tastes in cut (witness the enthusiasm for antique diamonds and colored diamonds) and consumer preferences (size, cut quality, clarity and color). Indeed, I remember several threads where new vendors rudely dismissed the color/clarity choices of a particular consumer as inferior, and many consumers jumped in to defend the right of a consumer to make a choice different from the "traditional" retail view that D-F color and high clarity stones are better "values" than are stones with lower colors and clarities.

So if PS, and RT in particular, continues to slide downward into this abyss of "faith-based" versus "science," I do not see rosy days ahead. For those are arguments that cannot be won or lost -- it's a difference of values and philosophy. And, I, for one, joined because PS is (was) one of the few safe havens providing knowledge for scientific advancement's sake rather than the smoke and mirrors of the snake oil salesman.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

To Ira and RD,
I was referring to this thread and the numerous, contentious threads, which have repeatedly deteriorated into name calling and accusations. I do believe that the trade people want to help us and I have learned a lot from them. I'm frustrated by 10 page threads that go around in circles and trying to pick through the insults to find the knowledge. This and my other posts in this thread were not meant to be an indictment against our helpful trade people. I am asking that they listen to the concerns that a number of us have expressed. Bring us your knowledge without the drama. Let us start to respect each other again. Let us be welcoming community to new vendors. It takes time to understand the PS culture. We should be willing to help new trade people find their way instead of jumping on them. We should offer the same courtesy to any newcomer to this site.

I hope that this better clarifies my POV.

I think this is valuable perspective.

I agree a valid point but I suggest that this be directed at the Administrator and Moderators not at trademembers themselves.

If those that want to learn about the science and trends of diamond selection are prevented from doing so by those who want to maintain the status quo of traditional methods than there is a problem with Pricescope.

This is a problem that supporters of traditional or scientific weighted methods are not capable of self moderating. We are not impartial observers or moderators and shouldn't have to be. Self moderation was easier when more trade participants helped balance arguments with well researched positions on both sides but this seems to be more limited now. Too much "colored" and often unsupported opinion destroys educational content in many threads.

If a PC and "friendly" yet restricted posting environment is truly the goal of Pricescope than enforcement needs to be swift, comprehensive, and readily apparant. I would like to see moderators given greater authority to edit or delete posts and to see them use this responsibility judiciously. I see reluctance to edit a post (because it might change its meaning) and I think this concern is far outweighed by the need to keep personal attacks and "colored" arguments to a minnimum.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Sara, without a doubt, there are problems with a fair percentage of sellers who don't place consumer information, or safety as a priority.
Indeed, the terms "snake oil salesman" or "smoke and mirrors" are apt in describing many jewelers right here on 47th street. Deceptive lighting, lack of money back guarantees, pushy salespeople- all raise a red flag.
However there are still a great deal of honest, knowledgeable sellers , offering high end, well cut diamonds, who's selection methods don't involve reflectors.
Indeed, they may carry different types of stones due to the different methods. Which may appeal to different consumers- who may very well come here asking questions.

If the environment here does not allow for both, consumers loose.
The concept that we can have differing points of view, without making one or the other "wrong" seems like a good course.
If a consumer wants to read a 20 page thread talking about crushed ice, they may. Some may find resonance in the questioning of certain PS "givens"
Some of these "givens" are simply not agreed upon by very knowledgeable, honest tradespeople who are the furthest thing possible from snake oil salesman.
If a consumer is told that aset is mandatory for selecting well cut stones, there is a very real possibility they'll make incorrect judgement on such info.
For example, they walk into a fine store, with a seller committed to both fine make, and customer information and satisfaction.
Consumer-"I want to see an aset"
Seller- "We don't use aset, we select our stones based on visually inspecting them"

If it's never corrected, reading PS could easily further the impression that the seller is trying to hide something, or sell inferior goods- when that might not be the case at all.

 

[Lula]

Sara, part of what drives me, as a professional is how much I care about this business, and the way consumers are treated.

I have never doubted your commitment to the business, David, and I respect that

Although we are now a retail operation, I also spent a considerable amount of time selling to jewelers- I have experience dealing with a lot of jewelers, as well as consumers.
Without a doubt, there are problems with a fair percentage of sellers who don't place consumer information, or safety as a priority.
Indeed, the terms "snake oil salesman" or "smoke and mirrors" are apt in describing many jewelers right here on 47th street. Deceptive lighting, lack of money back guarantees, pushy salespeople- all raise a red flag.
However there are still a great deal of honest, knowledgeable sellers , offering high end, well cut diamonds, who's selection methods don't involve reflectors.
Indeed, they may carry different types of stones due to the different methods. Which may appeal to different consumers- who may very well come here asking questions.

If the environment here does not allow for both, consumers loose.

I disagree wholeheartedly with this; I believe today's jeweler needs to offer both state-of-the-art technology (as well as know how to use it correctly -- the continuing education that Wink mentioned a page or two back on this thread) and visual inspection expertise. To offer the customer just visual inspection without the objective tools simply muddies the waters and creates opportunities for confusion and deception. If a jeweler's visual inspection method is as good as he/she says it is, the ASET, IS, etc., will serve as objective reinforcement of that jeweler's skill and should pose no threat to the honest jeweler.

The concept that we can have differing points of view, without making one or the other "wrong" seems like a good course.
If a consumer wants to read a 20 page thread talking about crushed ice, they may. Some may find resonance in the questioning of certain PS "givens"
Some of these "givens" are simply not agreed upon by very knowledgeable, honest tradespeople who are the furthest thing possible from snake oil salesman.
If a consumer is told that aset is mandatory for selecting well cut stones, there is a very real possibility they'll make incorrect judgement on such info.
For example, they walk into a fine store, with a seller committed to both fine make, and customer information and satisfaction.
Consumer-"I want to see an aset"
Seller- "We don't use aset, we select our stones based on visually inspecting them"

Again, I maintain that this is a philosophical argument, and I prefer to do business with jewelers that back up their visual inspection methods with data

If it's never corrected, reading PS could easily further the impression that the seller is trying to hide something, or sell inferior goods- when that might not be the case at all. In my experience, and in the experience of many others, this is all too often the case. In fact, I see these "visually inspected" beauties for sale on Craigslist all the time, and I always feel depressed and a little sad that so many consumers paid so much for such poor cut quality -- and most of these diamonds were purchased at locally owned, established jewelry stores (not mall stores) and are uncertified and/or come with an overinflated appraisal written by the store

I don't want this thread to turn into another debate about faith-based vs. scientific approaches.

So returning to the original question, I believe that PS needs to take a long hard look at what philosophy it wants to promote, and write up a vendor manifesto that outlines that philosophy. I, for one, think the longer this philosophical debate goes on, the more of a turn-off it is to both consumers and vendors, and, worse, it serves to confuse newbies who are coming here seeking information that will help them get the best diamond for their money.

The prosumer system works; in fact, there have been many, many threads where newbies are asking about the relative merits of H&A and near H&A, super-ideal vs near-ideal, and prosumers have done a great job of helping newbies decide what is most important to the newbie. Often, a newbie decides that they don't need a super-duper-mind-clean H&A, and would be just as happy with a "near H&A" or a well-cut 60-60. So in my opinion, the PS prosumers are already doing what you say is missing from the forum. And they are doing it well! With the help of reflector technology and with the suggestion to the newbie that he/she use his/her own eyes to make the final choice. The system already incorporates the value of visual inspection; your insistence that it doesn't just does not ring true to me.

 

[kenny]

So returning to the original question, I believe that PS needs to take a long hard look at what philosophy it wants to promote, and write up a vendor manifesto that outlines that philosophy.

Excellent point!
Seems like PS has lost it's way ... Now it seems PS wants to: educate about good cut but remain "polite" and "PC" by never calling anything bad cut.

You can't have it both ways.
Respecting diversity shouldn't include respecting a tradition of overcharging for junk.
Bad cut is real and bad vendors are real.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

David the topic is veering again.
Reflectors are rejection tools.

You have not made any suggestions to achieve the goals on page 1, first post?

 

[Rockdiamond]

Sara- on the one hand - and we agree- you don't want to turn this into a philosophical discussion on the merits of what is termed here "scientific" approach- yet that's exactly what you are suggesting.
If PS management was to decide that only those espousing reflector technology are allowed, it would cut off a large segment of both the buying public, as well as trade members.

I have found that using aset for rejection leads to one type of stone, whereas using visual inspection may lead to another.
By all means, if you prefer sellers using aset, there is nothing at wrong with that- and you'll find plenty of support here on PS.

I would ask as respectfully as possible that we all consider how we term things.
For example if someone said "I don't use that crazy recycled ping pong ball called an aset" many people who value aset might find that insulting. I would equate such a statement to relating snake oil, or fugly stones being offered on craigslist with sellers not using reflectors- a generalization in either case is simply not accurate- and also likely to be seen as an insult.

ETA- I agree Garry- but it's difficult to separate the two issues as this debate is at the heart of what I feel is keeping more sellers off PS.

I continue to suggest that pejorative remarks from people are a deterrent from more participation.

 

[AGBF]

Respecting diversity shouldn't include respecting a tradition of overcharging for junk.
Bad cut is real and bad vendors are real.

Wow! This is strong language. I wonder if you would consider my first diamond, which was bought through a traditional bricks and mortar jeweler before cut became so important, "junk". I bought it back in the days when 60/60 was an ideal cut! I am still quite fond of that stone.

Deb/AGBF

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

keeping more sellers off PS.

I am glad they are deterred, sellers and educators are two different things.

 

[Maisie]

I am definitely not a PS'er who understands the technical stuff and numbers surrounding buying a diamond. What I wanted to say is this. If someone has the luxury of going into a store and choosing a diamond with their eyes, the posh tools aren't as necessary as they are if you are trying to choose a diamond unseen. PS is an internet community with the capability of reaching right around the world. Vendors are able to sell to people in different countries who wouldn't normally be able to buy from them. In these instances the tools are invaluable to making an informed decision when your eyes can't. I agree that these tools should be used and I only wish I understood them more.

I would like to see vendors explaining this sort of stuff in simple terms and the discussions not spiraling into who can be the most technical and who shouldn't even be commenting. There are many of us who want to learn more, but most of the discussions end up being too confusing and unhelpful.

 

[Lula]

Respecting diversity shouldn't include respecting a tradition of overcharging for junk.
Bad cut is real and bad vendors are real.

Wow! This is strong language. I wonder if you would consider my first diamond, which was bought through a traditional bricks and mortar jeweler before cut became so important, "junk". I bought it back in the days when 60/60 was an ideal cut! I am still quite fond of that stone.

Deb/AGBF

There are many 60/60s that are well-cut. "Well-cut" is not a term reserved only for perfect H&A stones. You can have well-cut 60-60s and poorly cut 60-60s, just as you can have some H&A stones that are not well-cut.

John Pollard's article on "What the lab report doesn't show" -- the title is close to that; can't remember the exact title -- has photos of well-cut 60/60s with their corresponding IS photos.

eta: Here's the link to the article https://www.pricescope.com/journal/laboratory_cut_grades_what_report_doesn’t_show
Look at diamond #4.

 

[Lula]

keeping more sellers off PS.

I am glad they are deterred, sellers and educators are two different things.

Well said.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I'm purely a consumer (and not much of one, to boot), but after reading this thread I'm left to wonder - what exactly are members of the trade supposed to participate about? Does PS want them to help consumers find diamonds they love? To answer general questions for consumers about diamonds without specific reference to purchasing stones? To discuss and advance diamond education on a higher, non-consumer level?

This isn't clear to me. I've only been a member of the site for a little over a year (plus I found it not because of an interest in diamonds but via searching about being anxious for my boyfriend to propose!) so I don't know much about these great debates in the mythical past. I do think it is important to clarify the ultimate goal, though, to determine what steps could/should be taken to make that happen.

Yes yes yes yes yes. This is all going in circles until the goal is identified.

 

[Lula]

I'm purely a consumer (and not much of one, to boot), but after reading this thread I'm left to wonder - what exactly are members of the trade supposed to participate about? Does PS want them to help consumers find diamonds they love? To answer general questions for consumers about diamonds without specific reference to purchasing stones? To discuss and advance diamond education on a higher, non-consumer level?

This isn't clear to me. I've only been a member of the site for a little over a year (plus I found it not because of an interest in diamonds but via searching about being anxious for my boyfriend to propose!) so I don't know much about these great debates in the mythical past. I do think it is important to clarify the ultimate goal, though, to determine what steps could/should be taken to make that happen.

Yes yes yes yes yes. This is all going in circles until the goal is identified.

Yes, it has gone in circles for at least a year. And I think it is the job of the admins to clearly state the goal so it's clear for vendors. Not all vendors may fit well on PS. That's not a bad thing.

But to let this "reflector technology" debate go unchecked for so long benefits neither consumers nor vendors, imho.

 

[Rockdiamond]

I used the word "sellers" - but meant tradespeople.
That would include gemologists, cutters, dealers etc.
Being a seller and an educator are not mutually exclusive though......

In terms of the debate about reflectors, it's by no means limited to PS, and it's not going anywhere- that's why respecting both sides is important.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Sara,For example, they walk into a fine store, with a seller committed to both fine make, and customer information and satisfaction.
Consumer-"I want to see an aset"
Seller- "We don't use aset, we select our stones based on visually inspecting them"

If it's never corrected, reading PS could easily further the impression that the seller is trying to hide something, or sell inferior goods- when that might not be the case at all.

but why can't we pick a stone that agrees with our eyes and the tools??... there are stones that will pass both test.

 

[slg47]

In terms of the debate about reflectors, it's by no means limited to PS, and it's not going anywhere- that's why respecting both sides is important.

respecting both sides is important, but respect is only earned if members with different viewpoints express their ideas in a manner which earns them respect. posting just for the sake of dissenting is different than posting to educate and enlighten.

 

[risingsun]

To Ira and RD,
I was referring to this thread and the numerous, contentious threads, which have repeatedly deteriorated into name calling and accusations. I do believe that the trade people want to help us and I have learned a lot from them. I'm frustrated by 10 page threads that go around in circles and trying to pick through the insults to find the knowledge. This and my other posts in this thread were not meant to be an indictment against our helpful trade people. I am asking that they listen to the concerns that a number of us have expressed. Bring us your knowledge without the drama. Let us start to respect each other again. Let us be welcoming community to new vendors. It takes time to understand the PS culture. We should be willing to help new trade people find their way instead of jumping on them. We should offer the same courtesy to any newcomer to this site.

I hope that this better clarifies my POV.

I think this is valuable perspective.

I agree a valid point but I suggest that this be directed at the Administrator and Moderators not at trademembers themselves.

If those that want to learn about the science and trends of diamond selection are prevented from doing so by those who want to maintain the status quo of traditional methods than there is a problem with Pricescope.

This is a problem that supporters of traditional or scientific weighted methods are not capable of self moderating. We are not impartial observers or moderators and shouldn't have to be. Self moderation was easier when more trade participants helped balance arguments with well researched positions on both sides but this seems to be more limited now. Too much "colored" and often unsupported opinion destroys educational content in many threads

If a PC and "friendly" yet restricted posting environment is truly the goal of Pricescope than enforcement needs to be swift, comprehensive, and readily apparant. I would like to see moderators given greater authority to edit or delete posts and to see them use this responsibility judiciously. I see reluctance to edit a post (because it might change its meaning) and I think this concern is far outweighed by the need to keep personal attacks and "colored" arguments to a minnimum.

CCL~ I have made this known to admin and the mods. I also think it is important for the consumers to directly address the trade people, as well. What is happening now is not working well. Attracting more trade people, while this situation exists, does not seem like a good idea. It wouldn't change the group dynamics, as they stand now.

John~thank you for validating my opinion. I have greatly missed your participation on PS. You are a great mentor and you teach in a respectful way, which others can understand.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

I'm purely a consumer (and not much of one, to boot), but after reading this thread I'm left to wonder - what exactly are members of the trade supposed to participate about? Does PS want them to help consumers find diamonds they love? To answer general questions for consumers about diamonds without specific reference to purchasing stones? To discuss and advance diamond education on a higher, non-consumer level?

This isn't clear to me. I've only been a member of the site for a little over a year (plus I found it not because of an interest in diamonds but via searching about being anxious for my boyfriend to propose!) so I don't know much about these great debates in the mythical past. I do think it is important to clarify the ultimate goal, though, to determine what steps could/should be taken to make that happen.

Yes yes yes yes yes. This is all going in circles until the goal is identified.

Yes, it has gone in circles for at least a year. And I think it is the job of the admins to clearly state the goal so it's clear for vendors. Not all vendors may fit well on PS. That's not a bad thing.

But to let this "reflector technology" debate go unchecked for so long benefits neither consumers nor vendors, imho.

I have some carefully selected educational material on the uses and limitations of ASET, and how to interpret ASET images of fancy shape diamonds and common mistakes in interpretation. I would like to start an educational thread on the topic, and present this material, but right now I'm not going to bother sharing it and wasting my time if the thread will be interrupted and reduced to simply my opinion by self serving trademembers.

 

[kenny]

I have some carefully selected educational material on the uses and limitations of ASET, and how to interpret ASET images of fancy shape diamonds and common mistakes in interpretation. I would like to start an educational thread on the topic, and present this material, but right now I'm not going to bother sharing it and wasting my time if the thread will be interrupted and reduced to simply my opinion by self serving trademembers.

How sad.
I blame the good life in the USA and USA Today and TV for how stupid people have become.
Many can't even think rationally any more.
They just drift from thing to thing to be sensitive and upset about based on a sound bite or two.

Media.

 

[Allison D.]

I've watched this thread develop, and for me, the progression of this very thread itself embodies much of what is broken here.

The general themes read something like:

"LESS FILLING'......."TASTES GREAT"............"NO, LESS FILLING"............."ABSOLUTELY NOT, TASTES GREAT".

"I know you are, but what am I?"

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, ........"

THIS is what's broken on Pricescope, and that breakage has led to the chicken/egg debate now. Are consumers leaving because there are less contributing trademembers? Are trademembers leaving because there are fewer interested consumers? Is EVERYONE leaving because of the incessant bickering?

There was not always agreement in days past; in fact, far from it. But for me, it did feel as though there was at least a willingness on the part of opposing contributors to consider whether there might be middle ground or, if not, TOLERANCE for divergent opinions and preferences. I don't see much of that these days; instead it's a slugfest to see which side can yell louder and despite that, neither side hears a word the other has said.

Todd's recap is an astonishingly accurate recounting of the path travelled to get here. Unless enough contributors are willing to set aside the axes they are grinding, I don't see a way to move in a different direction.

 

[ChunkyCushionLover]

I've watched this thread develop, and for me, the progression of this very thread itself embodies much of what is broken here.

The general themes read something like:

"LESS FILLING'......."TASTES GREAT"............"NO, LESS FILLING"............."ABSOLUTELY NOT, TASTES GREAT".

"I know you are, but what am I?"

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, ........"

THIS is what's broken on Pricescope, and that breakage has led to the chicken/egg debate now. Are consumers leaving because there are less contributing trademembers? Are trademembers leaving because there are fewer interested consumers? Is EVERYONE leaving because of the incessant bickering?

There was not always agreement in days past; in fact, far from it. But for me, it did feel as though there was at least a willingness on the part of opposing contributors to consider whether there might be middle ground or, if not, TOLERANCE for divergent opinions and preferences. I don't see much of that these days; instead it's a slugfest to see which side can yell louder and despite that, neither side hears a word the other has said.

Todd's recap is an astonishingly accurate recounting of the path travelled to get here. Unless enough contributors are willing to set aside the axes they are grinding, I don't see a way to move in a different direction.

Allison,

I don't put myself in the camp that refuses to acknowledge or properly paraphrase the oppostion's position, I know both sides well.
I have been reviewing GIA's foundations on Cut grading article (G&G Fall 2004) recently and seeing a great deal of agreement with AGSL's in several areas despite its less robust scientific methods and more subjective methodology.

Perhaps before you diminish the time and efforts of "both sides" in debates over reflector education you should look inwards at how much educating yourself and Whiteflash have been doing on the forums recently.

I gave your company an open opportunity to educate us, instead I saw an awful lot of self promotional type of statements without answering the specific questions asked by myself and other consumers.

Is a further answer from a WF representative forthcoming?

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...4-chevron-pavilion-how-does-wf-decide.148787/

 

[Allison D.]

Allison,

I don't put myself in the camp that refuses to acknowledge or properly paraphrase the oppostion's position, I know both sides well.
I have been reviewing GIA's foundations on Cut grading article (G&G Fall 2004) recently and seeing a great deal of agreement with AGSL's in several areas despite its less robust scientific methods and more subjective methodology.

Perhaps before you diminish the time and efforts of "both sides" in debates over reflector education you should look inwards at how much educating yourself and Whiteflash have been doing on the forums recently.

I gave your company an open opportunity to educate us, instead I saw an awful lot of self promotional type of statements without answering the specific questions asked by myself and other consumers.

Is a further answer from a WF representative forthcoming?]

CCL, with due respect, my comments were not directed at you or any other single person; there are my general observations of behavior that has been systemically affecting Pricescope. Clearly I'm not alone in this perception since many others have observed it too.

Neither did I diminish time NOR effort anyone is spending; my post is speaking to tone and lack of openmindedness and how *those* things may be contributing to the decline of participation on Pricescope.

You're right; I have not been participating as heavily on Pricescope as in years past. There is FAR more that I cannot contribute now as a member of the trade, as Karl aptly pointed out in the thread you started. For those threads I could participate in, well....many's the time I've been halfway through typing a repsonse only to find that the topic has veered off AGAIN.....and I realize it's not worth the effort. Lastly, there are times when if I were to post truthfully, it would be to correct misinformation or put a stop to perpetuating misinformation. Trouble is, if I do that, I run the risk of alienating the person(s) whose information I'm correcting. How to win in that situation? Restraint of pen and tongue (and keyboard).

We do appreciate that you're interested in learning more from us in starting the thread, but as Karl mentioned in your thread, there's a limit to what we can say before someone leans on the "report" button. You know as well as I do WF is already perceived by many to be one of the 'favored' vendor (correctly or not), so we have to be even MORE judicious about not appearing to self-promote. As is typically, the level of detail needed increases as someone is actively contemplating of our our stones, and we make ample time in our appointments with them to discuss those specifics.

Last, please do also understand that like most vendors, our contributions to the forum as done as an 'as time allows' basis and come secondary to taking care of our business. They are also likely to increase in frequency when the climate is less demanding/condemning and more receptive. Some of the agendas are woefully transparent, and in those cases, smart vendors abstain.

 

[pancake]

Great posts, AllisonD.