- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 58,547
Re: "Diamond expert" told me to stick to measurements only..
Just to respond to a couple of things, as we agree on many things.
I did not reply to the question of whether that stone it was painted because... A) I did not know, B) to my knowledge WF had not ordered "New Line" stones cut with slight painting for several years (and it was never to a negative degree in the first place as I think John Pollard had written about...some people requested and preferred them), and 3) I thought it might be a photography issue. The stone looked absolutely perfectly cut to me, it had a nice red idealscope image, and it looked like a fine ACA to me (and it is!). That was my opinion of the images. I figured if the thread was bumped up, eventually an a gemologist/jeweler would come along, preferably someone like Bryan or John P. I would imagine that Bryan was also caught off guard because they do not order stones cut like that and probably have not since he came to WF, so I can see why he would assume it wasn't until he further checked on the stone itself. He made the correction and there was an interesting discussion on the thread, I thought.
I tried to help Joshua in an earlier thread and gave him some suggestions about how to survive here, and he has done exceptionally well on the forum! I have no problem of him expressing his opinion to his customers on diamonds, light performance, etc. However, if he intends to advertise on PS, it would probably be a good idea to not say that PS people don't know what they are talking about in regard to diamond recommendations (although that does sometimes happen), that all stones that have certain numbers will look exactly the same, and idealscope images are not needed or important, etc. Of course, that is his perogative if that is the way he feels. I say what I think, too! I want to like him, actually. But, if what he honestly believes is that we are just stupid and know nothing about diamonds (and idealscope is pushed by one of the PS owners for financial reasons, etc) and continues to tell customers that, I think he won't have many of us who care to recommend his stones on the forum, either.
pfunk|1424911179|3838275 said:diamondseeker2006|1424897020|3838137 said:pfunk, the problems started with the first post and people had questions about ED (a new vendor) and their attitude toward customers about PS and the tools we use and recommend to assess light performance. Once people had doubts, then it did drift into another territory that seemed possible but apparently was coincidence and not true at all. I messaged the moderator a few hours ago to alert them to the page 3 posts and to ask them to consider deleting them.
In the other case you mentioned, the vendor is very well known and respected here and would never purposely misrepresent anything on this forum. When he checked into the stone further, he came back and corrected his earlier statement, as I recall. In any event, it was not a negative or excessive kind of painting. Two very different scenarios.
I have dealt with Joshua personally, and would agree that he uses casual speech in his dealings with customers. Some here feel it's unprofessional and have stated so, while I tend to be ok with it as it feels "real" or genuine to me. I prefer people to come out and say how it is, but that is just me. He seems the type that states his opinions openly and defends his reasons for why he feels the way he does. Nothing wrong with that, but it will no doubt ruffle some feathers and hopefully he can deal with the backlash. This thread seems to hint that he can. I would agree there was no harm in questioning him about SI diamonds and eye cleanliness, as his experience seems to be out of line with the rest of the trade. But the rest was over the top IMO, and the eagerness of some people to jump on board with the fraudulent business is what I find unacceptable.
Yes, the other vendor is well respected and for good reason. I agree they would never intentionally mislead someone, but intentional or not there was misinformation given and thankfully people here caught it and he eventually got a lot of great info from the vendor. I found your response to that particular thread interesting. The title asked if the diamond was painted or dug out, and you touted the diamond for how beautiful it would be without answering what the poster was asking. It doesn't matter if the painting or digging was excessive or detrimental. They asked if it was painted or dug out and that is what should be answered. The effects of such a cut could then be explained to them.
Seems like this new vendor to PS has really been under the microscope in several threads since they arrived here, and this thread really gives enchanted a bad rap for an unfounded reason. Sure, you can delete the posts that link them to a fraudulent company, but everyone who has read this topic (a lot) have already seen it and may not come back to find out the two should NOT have been linked. I think people need to start making sure of themselves before they post implied, accusatory statements about vendors. On a medium like this, it can have very detrimental effects and certainly all the regulars here know that.
Just to respond to a couple of things, as we agree on many things.
I did not reply to the question of whether that stone it was painted because... A) I did not know, B) to my knowledge WF had not ordered "New Line" stones cut with slight painting for several years (and it was never to a negative degree in the first place as I think John Pollard had written about...some people requested and preferred them), and 3) I thought it might be a photography issue. The stone looked absolutely perfectly cut to me, it had a nice red idealscope image, and it looked like a fine ACA to me (and it is!). That was my opinion of the images. I figured if the thread was bumped up, eventually an a gemologist/jeweler would come along, preferably someone like Bryan or John P. I would imagine that Bryan was also caught off guard because they do not order stones cut like that and probably have not since he came to WF, so I can see why he would assume it wasn't until he further checked on the stone itself. He made the correction and there was an interesting discussion on the thread, I thought.
I tried to help Joshua in an earlier thread and gave him some suggestions about how to survive here, and he has done exceptionally well on the forum! I have no problem of him expressing his opinion to his customers on diamonds, light performance, etc. However, if he intends to advertise on PS, it would probably be a good idea to not say that PS people don't know what they are talking about in regard to diamond recommendations (although that does sometimes happen), that all stones that have certain numbers will look exactly the same, and idealscope images are not needed or important, etc. Of course, that is his perogative if that is the way he feels. I say what I think, too! I want to like him, actually. But, if what he honestly believes is that we are just stupid and know nothing about diamonds (and idealscope is pushed by one of the PS owners for financial reasons, etc) and continues to tell customers that, I think he won't have many of us who care to recommend his stones on the forum, either.