A question of Ethics

[Lapa]

Guys,

Dave (and others ) have strongly voiced their request for a new thread to deal with issues separately. Since no one else apparently wants to to it, I'll get the ball rolling.

I have tried to remained cool-headed and even-minded when reading about Andrew's mishaps with a fellow forum member some 2 1/2 years ago.

I understand that this matter happened outside of this Forum, but the essence of the two cases is very similar: some members doing something wrong. I believe that it raises some issues of a wider scope than simply the sale/purchase of a few fake medals. Namely, IMHO, it raises a serious problem of Ethics (yes, I used a capital "E"; if you are not fully sure of the meaning, I'll refer you to the nearest Collins Encyclopedic Dictionary).

I agree that we, as a Forum, are not meant to become a Courthouse bent on adjudicating collecting wrongdoings, no matter where they happened. BUT we do have a duty to keep our eyes (and ears) opened to what happens in our little part of the Universe (namely, collecting Soviet OMDs and memorabilia).

From what I have read so far in the other thread, the "official" Forum position is that "we don't care about what happens beyond our walls as long as everyone behaves properly here"; that I find somewhat disturbing.

Please note one thing extremely important here: I am NOT advocating Andrew's case, in which I have no interest, one way or an other; I am highlighting from this past, apparently unfortunate event, a glaring loophole that needs to be addressed and closed.

History is replete with examples of such an approach as the Forum's current one, from the inquisition, to the role of the Church during WWII, to the safe harboring of War criminals, to pedophilia, etc (before jumping on your keyboard to machine-gun style type your outraged answer at the use of these terms, stop for a minute and think about why I did select them and what their true meaning is). OK, our issue at hand is not that serious, but it is in the exact same vein, and therefore is highly disturbing to me.

I, for one, highly enjoy contributing to this Forum and interacting with its members, without needing to double guess who is at the other end; I do not like the idea of being associated with known "criminals" under the only pretext that "they behave adequately here", no matter what they do elsewhere. It is a blindsighted position, which completely undermines the very reason for this Forum to exist.

I believe that this Forum should adopt a Code of Ethics that members must agree to and uphold at all times. It would not be the first organization to do so, and definitely will not be the last one.

Marc

[charlet]

I follow this idea. It is a question of trust too, I need to trust the fellow members I could deal and discuss with.

[medals73]

Well put, Marc.

[UQWozza]

I would also like to support Marc's call for a "Code of Ethics" for the members of the forum. I too would like to feel that I could deal with any member of this forum.

I also agree that problems with forum members occurring outside the forum should be taken into account.

However, I think we will have to be very clear in this:

1. with an explicit description of how we consider a "good" member should act;
   
2. a clearly explained procedure for making complaints against members (what evidenc will be required?);
   
3. a grievance procedure for members who have complaints made against them;
   
4. an explicit list of penalties (warnings to temporary bans to expulsion) for members who do not act according to our agreed standards.
   

Is there a member with legal training that can comment on the potential problems with setting up such a code?

Simon

[Greg Collins]

While I agree with the idea of a Code of Ethics, I believe this all boils down to the honour of the individual; you're either honourable or you're not, and no amount of legislation, laws or rules will change this. Perhaps I sound jaded with respect to this but after working in a maximum security prison for nearly nine years, I find that most convicts are sorry for their crime(s) only because they were caught.

When buying ODM's from a source you don't know, you're very often relying on your own eye and expertise to judge images on the internet or the descriptions given. In this time of rampant uncontrolled greed, you "pays your money and takes your chances". While I do still use that very popular auction site occasionally and for more minor purchases, I now use dealers I have come to know and trust for the more important (and expensive) items. T'is the climate we live in today.

[medals73]

While this is a great idea, there are many problems, problems both the OMSA and OMRS have had to contend with and problems which (when mixed with a large helping of abject cowardice) have led them essentially to abandon this whole "ethics" thing. Who wants to sit as judge and jury on these issues? In today's lawyer-infested age, judging these issues -- or even providing a forum for the judgment process -- may be viewed as opening those involved up for (EXPENSIVE) legal action.

On eBay you truly have to take your chances. Do not tango with tigers if you aren't prepared to get nipped. The total uninvolvement of eBay with anything to do with ethics (laws are another issue, e.g. why they can't sell Nazi stuff) should be instructive.

While I think it is delusional to think we can circumscribe a line around what goes on the forum and what takes place in The Real World, I wonder how far we are willing to go down the slippery path of universal policing. I wish we could do better, I suspect/fear we won't.

Maybe just a clear consensus statement of what are (and are not) "good practices" may be the best we as a community can do. Enforcement will be a more difficult step, rather like any other law that seeks to govern human ethical behavior.

And, as Greg says, ultimately it just comes down to trust. There are a few individuals I trust, a much shorter list of dealers I trust (and that grows shorter every month, either by their choice or mine). And when either community betrays that trust, I just cross them off. Maybe that's all we can do?

The massive disillusionment many of us have come to feel with the "hobby" has also come through in many of the posts surrounding this issue. It is not just the insane price inflation that is prompting many to spend more money on research and books and language lessons and less on acquisitions. Or in some cases, people choose just to go off and collect hubcaps (or are they being faked these days with fraudulent "groups" and all?).

[Art]

How about this. I close the forsale section down completely, the site loses the meager amount it makes from charging $20 a year, the site then eventually closes.

This isn't going to develop into a new lawmaking thing where there is policing, background checks and enforcing to make sure transactions here go picture perfect. If you do not like it, or feel uncomfortable using it, don't use it. If people don't use it, I will eventually shut it down and then who knows where we will go from there with the loss of the massive amounts of money the sales section generates for this site

The rules for the marketplace are clearly posted in the rules section of the marketplace faq.

The thread has been closed. This warrants no further discussion.