| Original Message: Having a system is infinitely better than having no system. |
|---|
|
Hi Joyce and David, As you know, back in the days when eBay was fresh and new, it was possible to communicate with the founders, give them direct feedback, and cary on a conversation. I think they were happy to receive a message that was encouraging, because I was told they got a LOT of static from people who were not happy with the way things were run. Of course, there are always vocal complainers. In one of my chats with Pam, I recall recommending that they change the definition of "antique" as "100 years old or older," to replace their incorrect usage of "50 years old or older." In particular, I mentioned that since the history of beads goes back to at least 30,000 BCE, fifty years ago is much too recent a time. I also said that the 100 years mark was very common in the antiques trade; and that the only artifacts I could think of that were routinely called "antique" that were as recent as from fifty years ago are automobiles—and this because the history of the automobile is itself recent. Strictly speaking, there are NO "antique cars"—but you'll never convince a car buff of this (I say as someone who used to hang out with a crowd of classic car devotees here in the Bay Area). Pam thanked me for my opinion, but said they were going to keep their definition..., and I have just accepted this over the past eight years. Recently, the prospect of having new categories for presenting collectible beads in a more accurate and equitable manner has seemed like a progressive step to me. You know I have given my opinion when asked, and you know that I know there is no easy solution to the problems people have faced and will face using ANY system. And we all know, any system can be abused and/or circumvented. I have to say, I am surprised to read of the strong reactions people are having to the new eBay system. I hope it is mostly a matter of having to cope and adjust to something that is merely different. It certainly seems like a venting exercise. I never cease to be amazed that if you say one thing, people will interpret it as something else. "A" isn't "A"—it's "B." Thus, when a bead is categorized as "Modern" it isn't merely modern, it must be "New." This is illogical thinking. And it seems to be based on fear and emotion. If I cross the street, it's possible I may be run down by a crazed driver. But that doesn't mean I am going to desist from crossing streets. It means I have to careful and take responsibility for myself. Or else I am stuck in my home for the duration.... Are muracad ("Kiffa") beads modern? They absolutely are! As far as anyone knows, they didn't exist before about eighty years ago—and they are all made from glass that didn't exist before about eighty years ago (the time that the NEW MODEN glass chemistry that developed between 1880 and 1920 changed the color palate of glass-beadmaking. Again, if you think about the history of beads as encompassing 32,000 years ago to this week, the previous eighty years are a speck on that timeline. The words "Modern" and "Contemporary" are not interchangeable. Contemporary is more recent than Modern. Modern is more recent than Antique. Antique is more recent than Ancient. Imposing actual dates onto these categories to divide one from the other may be arbitrary—and certainly seems to be controversial—but essentially these categories provide realistic frameworks, even if there are instances where (in relation to a specific object) the span of production crosses over one of these arbitrary lines. When I think about how poor and unserviceable the categories at eBay were formerly—and when I think about the willful abuse of these categories (especially "Native American"!), I have to think that almost anything would be an improvement. But, in fact (although I may not be in 100 % agreement), I regard the new categories as a very equitable and doable system. I hope anyone who is tangibly involved, whether as a seller or buyer, will give this system a chance. All I can say is, Good Job! Jamey All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users |
|
|