posted on June 17, 2001 08:09:03 AM new
To set the record straight! Sharon left the "co-op" group along with JC which I joined them. Then she went back. And LibertyBid is making great progress. We are very up front and honest about who we are. No bait and switch.
I followed Sharon because I respected her. that's why i'm very disapointed in her. I wish you well in you new for profit business. I just don't think you did things properly
posted on June 17, 2001 08:14:19 AM new
mfc: I agree that it was an underhanded way to do things as well.
I would never use a "guise" to get others to build a business for me, under false pretenses.
Also, I think that the word co-op should no longer be permitted to be used here by Jamie and his business partners, as it may lead unsuspecting readers to think that they ARE a co-op, instead of a "FOR-PROFIT" small group of individuals.
posted on June 17, 2001 10:00:39 AM new
To Jamies statement.
"There was no Online Sellers co-op movement until I started!! "
This is false I personelly have traced discussion of online sellers Co-operatives back as far as 1998 and there are several sucessfull online Co-operatives that are up and running since 1999.
Check out this Book sellers Co-Opertive that is active and been running that start as a discussion group this is not a auction co-op but a store site tomfolio.com liveing live proof that online seller co-op talk and movement has be around nearly as long as the web as we know it today.
posted on June 17, 2001 02:58:28 PM new
dman3- THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! for posting that. I really appreciate it! I checked out Tomfolio, and have emailed them some questions, but it looks fantastic! I think I am going to start another thread about it asking if any AW's are already members there and how they are doing at it.
Are you a member dman? Do you shop there? just wondering. thanks again for posting!
posted on June 17, 2001 04:08:57 PM new
CAgrrl: Enchanted was the one who originally mentioned Tomfolio as being an example of a working on-line co-op. I don't think she's a member but I've sent her a link to your new thread in case she'd like to comment.
posted on June 17, 2001 05:07:17 PM new
thanks Irene! I appreciate that. I somehow missed seeing her original post, so I hope she does come back to follow up.
posted on June 17, 2001 07:30:37 PM new
Well, at least somebody finally had the good sense to take down the webpages that indicated that the site was going to be a co-op.
posted on June 17, 2001 08:09:47 PM new
It wasnt taken down Jamie attemped his own update to the site But doesnt know Much Html
he uploaded a blank site template with no information.
Much of the AuctionPie website was over writen with nothing mainly but blank web template pages other then some JPGs the person who made the template added as exsamples.
I take offense at your unwarranted comments about me, and your self serving explanations about the reasons for my split with your group. I too have all the corresponds between us --
Your correct about one thing, my relationship with your organization was short - but very educational. It did not take long for me to realize that we didn't agree on the method or direction of getting a suitable alternative to eBay. As for the mutiny -- I invited the ones that agreed with my views to come along with me and try another direction, and 3 out of the 5 active working members came along - Granted you bullied one of them back into the group, and she is still doing a wonderful job with the
Newsletter, but none of this was personal against you -- it was only an attempt to attain a goal of independence for the Auction Community.
As for our efforts -- we haven't even opened our site to the public, we are still in the building and developmental stage - but we
do have a plan, that will hopefully provide an alternative to the greed and repressing controls now being experienced by the current auction community, but only time will tell.
I have not done anything to undermined your efforts with your enterprise, and would appreciate the same consideration.
JC - AKA lothings or Landofthings
[ edited by landofthings on Jun 18, 2001 10:27 AM ]
posted on June 18, 2001 02:58:58 AM new
Thanks JC.
Glad to hear you are still around. Thanks for the compliment. The truth is, I have you to credit for my success with the newsletter. Your guidance has been helpful. I wish you luck in your venture.
As for the way things have been going since the announcement of AP and the direction that we are taking, I couldn't be more dissappointed. It seems that so many have joined the bandwagon in jumping to conclusions and throwing out accusations like they were common fact. It is sure discouraging at times. The one thing that keeps me going is the truth. Unfortunately not many people know it because of the posts that they have been reading. I can only hope that anyone that has had the opportunity to work with me knows that I have always had strong beliefs in the co-op movement and should know that I would never abandon them. I can whole heartedly say that I back AP because I know it's direction first hand. The direction is not much different from what it was in the beginning, and that is to provide a site that sellers and buyers can directly contribute to and profit from. I can understand that people believe what they read and cannot say that I blame them. All I can say is that their opinions will change when they see the results of our effort.
While I'm at it I would like to address something that was posted earlier in this thread...
<I>"""What a shame! Canvid has done more to damage the coop movement than ebay could ever hope to do! Good job! and i'm suprised Sharon that you even agree to this.
If you wanted to start a for profit company That's fine but, you should have given the name auctionpie (we voted on) and the mailing list to someone who would keep the co-op going.
The mailing (newsletter) list are people who are interested in a co-op NOT your for profit business and the name auctionpie was voted on by the group we thought this was going to be the name of the co-op. Instead you have used this all as a spring board for you own personal gain! And that's a SHAME."""</I>
Mike,
It is sure a surprise to see that you have joined the bandwagon. I am even more surprised that you made a personal attack on me when I wasn't even a part of the conversations here. Maybe one post. I'm not mad though, as you should already know, I have been quite clear about my position as far as the co-op movement goes. I've told you before that I had become discouraged with the lack of offers of help and general participation that I had been seeing from the online auction community. It's not just my opinion...it's a fact. And one that I predict any other co-op venture will witness.
See, that is the reason for the announcement made by Jamie about not being able to become a true co-op legally. Legally there would need to be a committee and without one there can be no co-op. His position has always been to go strictly co-op until now as time is of the essence. AND because he wanted to show auction users that a real site with sellers in mind could be accomplished. Most sellers wanted to see something tangible and the way things were going it just wasn't going to happen. I have said this on the boards before but seems like no one wants to listen. Everyone is finding it easier to just join in all the finger pointing, insulting and accusations. That's why what you have said doesn't anger me. I realize that you are basing what you wrote on what others have written in their posts and what you believed to be the truth, months ago, about the origin of the AP mail list.
I may have agreed with you at the time, but the truth is that the mail list that you have referred to in your post belongs to Jamie. You could track it if you wish, all the way back to a site that was created for him by Cathy Orosi. She heads the Vin Co-op site at the moment. If you wish you may email her. Her email address appears on the site.
Way back when you and I and JC were perusing our desire to form another group I believed that by my copying the mail list (with Jamie's approval) to use for my newsletter (which is also property of AP....with me acting as editor) it became my list. Oh how wrong I was. The list was created by "The Online Sellers Co-op" way before my time with AP. I do have an email that was sent me regarding the legalities of it. So, if you were not aware of it, you are now.
As for your opinion of who the name Auctionpie belongs to, it also belongs to Jamie Gilcig. It is copyrighted by him. You forget that Jamie came up with the name and yes, we did vote on it.........well, you and whoever did. I didn't personally because I was not at that Particular meeting. BUT, you voted on it as a part of The Online Sellers Co-op and you left, voluntarily I might ad. The name stayed with the group. For you to say that it should have been handed over to someone who would use it to form a co-op or keep the co-op movement going is undeniably irresponsible on your part. Same goes for a lot of things that are being said on the boards. A lot of people are responding to something they have read or something they assume to be true and do not have all the facts straight before doing so. I can understand though as some things tend to be taken as truth but in reality couldn't be further from it. I wish you would have emailed me before posting such statements. We at Auctionpie still believe in the ideals that a co-op represents and we still would like to apply them to Auctionpie. It is because of posts like this one that give readers the wrong idea. It's OK though, like I said before....the proof will be in the final product. Then and only then will the truth come out.
One more thing....as for the numbers that have backed AP so far....and as some have put, in blind faith, will always be able to decide whether or not they want to be a part of AP. Our newsletter is an opt in and opt out newsletter and everyone that gets it has the choice to or not. The same will go when the membership drive begins. We have been honest about our direction and will continue to. We can only hope that people will decide to believe that what we stood for in the beginning is what we still stand for today and that is that every online auction seller should have the right to help make decisions and ultimately profit from them and build their businesses with the support of the site that they sell on.
I am available if you want to talk. I have never had any problems with you and I hope that in the future your opinion of me will change. Fact is, you have me all wrong. I have done my best to help the online auction community and will continue to do so. If this idea (AP) doesn't work out, I will move on and try to devote my time with this effort elsewhere. I told you before that I had a dream. That dream was to bring folks such as yourself and other co-op groups together somehow. I haven't given up on that. Keep in mind though that there are sellers and buyers out there that have no clue of these movements and maybe never will. They would be happy with a site that in the end would give them the very same things that any co-op can. Everyone is screaming "Co-op", but isn't it the product of a co-op that should be important? Why is it that people think that only a co-op can provide such a product? To me, it is irrelevant what title our site has......gimme results and now you're talkin! Remember....I need a safe and supportive site to sell my stuff on too!
posted on June 18, 2001 09:58:39 AM new
Shaz,
Thanks for the email invite I have taken you up on. Responding here to some points:
You may have missed your previous 3 long comments on this thread, I don't know how you missed that but, in any regard.
I think it is unfair to blame the auction community for the lack of support. The reason for lack of support is the same reason you, JC and myself split from the "co-op group (you went back). The need for someone to have total control is what hurts a co-op NOT the lack of community support.
JC and I built LibertyBid not as a co-op because we didn't want to compete with the co-op. My disappointment isn't that you wanted to do the same thing but, the way you did it.
The AP name and mailing list was formed under the premise that is was for the co-op. It should have been turned over to someone like twinsoft who wants to further the movement. Not as a spring board to launch a for profit company.
It doesn't matter who thought of the name or who registered it. We all thought up names and voted on the one we thought was best.
Don't you see that if someone tries now to form a co-op it will be twice as hard? The community will be skeptical. How do we know you won't do like AP did and just turn it into a for profit company if we support it?
The one screaming co-op the most was AP it was all over the site, it's not fair to blame everyone else for wanting and talking about a co-op now that AP is going private.
It's a matter of trust and that trust has been broken. I only hope the co-op movement isn't dead. Libertybid will continue to support anyone in the auction community to futher the co-op movement.
posted on June 18, 2001 10:20:03 AM new
Thanks Sharon
And I would love to hear from you anytime.
First - Let me say that I fully understand the reasons for Auction Pie's apparent redirection in policies, and I DON'T believe that it is a SCAM - but a move to get things done. While the idea of a co-op appears to be a good idea - it is fraught with so many
pitfalls that making it work in the Internet environment is impossible. But making a privately own web site run by its users IS NOT! This was the main reason the Jamie and I disagreed so much in the beginning, and the main reason that I (and others) opted to head our own way with LibertyBid.
Co-op or Not is the question of this thread and many believe that the only possible way for it to be a Co-op, is for the site to be only run by the members. While this appears to be a great idea - it is in reality open to power plays by specific groups who want the site to go their way. A great example of this is the "Farmer's Co-op" -- originally started by the farmers for the farmers, but is now controlled by Big Business, making the individual small farmer's lives much harder.
The BEST way to insure that the members maintain control -- is to create a corporation who's by-laws and member agreement make it impossible for the direction of the original corporation policies to be changed. This can not be done by a Co-op, but can be better insured by a corporation. LibertyBid is doing this, and I believe that AP will also eventually end up at that point also.
While no one can guarantee that GREED won't take over -- A corporation, who's laws and members agreement is designed to prevent that from happening, can make it less likely. LibertyBid's corporate by-laws and member's agreement are doing just that. We have agreed by writing it into the corporate laws, that no individual owner can gain majority control of the corporation, and turn it into a GREED controlled site. I also feel the AP will probably do the same thing.
We all want the same thing here -- we want a place where anyone can come and offer their wares without having to pay a majority of the profits to do so. By providing a place where costs are down, buyers also benefits because the seller's don't need to gouge the customer in order to make a profit or even break even. We all want alternatives to the Greed controlled sites that are so prevalent on the Internet today.
I personally believe that this need will be met by many alternative sites - and our agreed support of each other will make this happen more quickly -- You the users will ultimately decide who you want to deal with, but don't consider every new idea with fear -- as most individuals aren't out to screw you -- but are only looking for a new way to serve, and yes make enough money to live, along the way!.
IMO
JC
[ edited by landofthings on Jun 18, 2001 10:44 AM ]
posted on June 18, 2001 10:49:13 AM new
Thanks JC.
You have hit the nail on the head here. I couldn't have said it better myself. Heck, just look it took me three or four tries and still couldn't get the words out. We at AP feel the very same way and yes, our goals are the same as well. It is unfortunate that we came to this conclusion after being so far into it. What is fortunate though is that sellers will still be able to participate to build a site that works for them.
I have always agreed with you on this and you know that. It was Mike who had trouble with it and obviously he still does. That's OK though. Nothing wrong with anything he has said here. I'm open minded and am glad that he took up the opportunity to call me on some things. I've emailed him in hopes to set the record straight. I appreciate his opinions but I don't appreciate that he has chosen to air them here. Only because misinformed posts and assumptions are read by other posters and taken to be truths. That is what starts a huge snowball effect and that is why the co-op movement has been known for much bickering. If only we could talk to one another before haphazardly making remarks that cannot be taken back.
I highly doubt that my decission to continue writing for AP will cause the co-op movement to fall on its ear, but if that's what I have done, I apologize. All I ask is that anyone that is a part of our mailing list, please consider that we have not changed our principles and our goals....only our name.
I am not BLAMING anyone. All I am saying is that without volunteers we could not effectively form a committee to help build. Two people is hardly a committee. Nonetheless, without a committee a co-op is impossible to get off the ground. I don't blame sellers for that. I can't say that I blame anyone for that. It is just something that is inevidable when trying to push a concept. People want something they can see and most of them don't have the time that is necessary to volunteer. I understand that. So, back again to what I have been saying all along.....no volunteers...no co-op. It was hardly a strategic move on our part. Just one that was necessary in order to be able to show sellers something tangible. JC is right that no one can guarantee that GREED would take over in a corporate situation, but that certain bylaws and member policies will help to make it less likely. We will also have such bylaws and policies in effect. Jamie and I are sellers too and we just want to be able to sell in an environment that has sellers best interests in mind.
posted on June 18, 2001 11:48:01 AM new
Shaz, "I had become discouraged with the lack of offers of help and general participation that I had been seeing from the online auction community."
You say you didn't get support. What about the several hundred people who signed your guestbook and signed up for your newsletter? One can only wonder if you WANTED help building a co-op. As for those 300 people who signed up, I have no doubt that you will contact them for money once the membership drive begins. Those people provided their contact info to the co-op movement in good faith. You say you own the list and can do whatever you want with it. What kind of respect does THAT show for your customers?
"Why is it that people think that only a co-op can provide such a product?"
Ironic, isn't it? What makes you think your for-profit site can provide anything different than any other "just another auction site?"
A co-op is a democratically run association. One member, one vote. THAT is how members are represented, not by the owners (who make the profit) deciding what is "best" for the rest.
Run an auction site however you want. But Auctionpie was packaged, promoted and sold as a CO-OP from the start. You used that hook to lure in volunteers, and promote the site on AW, and in several Internet publications. The label on the bottle says "Co-op." THAT is the problem. Whatever your reasons for abandoning the co-op, you have no right to spam those people who gave you their contact info in good faith.
Now you're painting co-ops as evil, and corporations as kind, generous and loving. Puh-leeze. Do the right thing. Take your listl and burn it.
posted on June 18, 2001 01:39:54 PM new
Look we are going in circles here. I agree that Jaimie registered and owns the name that is a legal fact. That does not justify this decision. I joined the co-op group because I believe in it! So did you Shaz. It is not for you or me, or anyone to decide that it won't work or that it's too difficult. If one believes that, or if one wanted to do something else. Like a for-profit company. I have NO problem at all with that. In my opinion if that is the case you or anyone else should do like others did, and pass it on.
No one owns the co-op movement! If someone builds a site for it, if someone buys a name for it, if you have a mailing list for it, it doesn't matter. Because you own or control the parts of it doesn't justify, or make it O.K. for anyone to use them as they wish. If anything, it makes that person(s) more responsible for it.
The people own the movement. If who ever registered auctionpe wanted auctionpie to be their's then, it shouldn't have been associated with the co-op movement in the first place.
If I told everyone that Libertybid was going to be a non-profit corporation I wouldn't then turn around and make it a for-profit. Look, I think it's great to have a private company that would care and have the concerns of the community first.
Is there anyway it can be done without killing the co-op movement?
posted on June 18, 2001 08:16:21 PM new
Geee.....the one thing you have all overlooked is that these people will all have a choice. As AP grows and changes, so will the mail list. You are all acting as if these people are being held prisoner. They aren't. Listen again....OPT IN AND OPT OUT. They are free to choose.....can't be fairer than that!
posted on June 19, 2001 04:58:01 AM new
So why does the AP home page still say "home of the auction sellers cooperative?" Why is there a co-op page that screams "Founding a Seller's Co-op Top Priority"?
It is not difficult or time consuming to change a web page/site. This is blatant false advertising.
