A Discussion On Bias

[Black Jade]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:45:32 PM
Author: Richard Sherwood
By the way, look how many people have been interested in this topic. Over 6600 views in 5 days.

The world is watching.

Wow.
My husband always that that is another thing not to forget when using the internet. You have no idea who might be reading, though not contributing.
You cannot EVER really erase anything that you wrote, so be careful to THINK before you press that SEND button.

 

[Black Jade]

Date: 7/28/2009 10:25:29 AM
Author: Serg

Date: 7/28/2009 9:46:13 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 7/28/2009 6:58:50 AM
Author: Serg


Karl,

I am strongly disagree .
Consumers can not receive good service and well balanced advices if vendors have not protection from false and vulgar consumers(bias) attacks

Hi Seg,

I have been thinking about what you''ve said here. Some of us have posted how we view David and his site. Because you don''t agree with us, that automatically makes everything we''ve said/feel false? Is that what you''re saying?

I gave a background on my previous jeweler experiences. I then gave examples of what David has done that has fed my cynicism with him. I wasn''t trying to be vindictive or attack him, I was being honest. I was trying to make him understand why I feel the way I do. How can that be ''wrong''?

hi Ellen,
No. If you are not agree with David, if you do not like him and his site, it is not false attake.
I could share you feeling.
But if anybody do statements as
1) David mistreat consumers
2) his diamonds are bad
3) do not buy this diamond from him
Without Any proof, it is false attak
I one give one example. Garry had huge fighting about david photos. garry thought what David use Photoshop. Garry was wrong
I asked Garry send examples wrong information from David site. I did not receive any clear example with what i can agree. I have high respect to Garry.

I do not like Garry, Karl , your style fighting with David becuase Mostly it is emotion without any facts.

Ellen I just want to repeat that the way you have behaved has been as always, exemplary. You are a class act online, and I would bet, in person, too.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 7/28/2009 9:46:13 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 7/28/2009 6:58:50 AM

Author: Serg



Karl,


I am strongly disagree .

Consumers can not receive good service and well balanced advices if vendors have not protection from false and vulgar consumers(bias) attacks

Hi Seg,


I have been thinking about what you''ve said here. Some of us have posted how we view David and his site. Because you don''t agree with us, that automatically makes everything we''ve said/feel false? Is that what you''re saying?


I gave a background on my previous jeweler experiences. I then gave examples of what David has done that has fed my cynicism with him. I wasn''t trying to be vindictive or attack him, I was being honest. I was trying to make him understand why I feel the way I do. How can that be ''wrong''?

Serg is one of those types.
He is either a scientist, engineer, mathematician etc.
They are highly educated and live in a world of "prove it or it isn''t so".
Unfortunately they apply this college debate team logic to everything.

Opinions and feelings are foreign to them.
They live in a world of facts.
Sometimes I wonder if they even realize they have opinions.

I don''t mean to be critical, just observant.
I worked in an engineering environment for decades and saw this all the time.
That said, these are wonderful people.
They are essential to progress in technical fields.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Hi Everyone!
New day, and not a lot of time but I did want to make ine point

Date: 7/28/2009 8:27:08 AM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/28/2009 7:13:54 AM
Author: Serg
Karl,


are you consumer? what PS rules should you follow ? for trades or for consumers?

I think PS administration needs add new category and rules for persons as I and you.

I operate on my own code that goes far beyond what the rules cover.
It aligns pretty well with the rules and I don''t get my hand slapped to often so it works.
I have created over the years my own position that doesn''t fit into any one category.
No matter what I end up doing my heart will always be with the consumers of PS.
My first duty will be to them on PS.

karl, if you have reported me and complained about me, yet somehow I''m still here, maybe you''re not happy wth the way PS is being run.
It''s a big internet out there- why don''t you start a forum about diamonds, and exclude experts!
THis way you could give any advice and never have to listen to someone who can show that in addition to the good advice you have given, some of your advice may have actually hurt a consumer- to say nothing of the evil, lowdown jewelers- but of course who cares about them, their families or communities.

Marion could hop on board and give her online therapy sessions too!

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:14:56 PM
Author: Rockdiamond
Hi Everyone!

New day, and not a lot of time but I did want to make ine point

Date: 7/28/2009 8:27:08 AM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 7/28/2009 7:13:54 AM

Author: Serg

Karl,



are you consumer? what PS rules should you follow ? for trades or for consumers?


I think PS administration needs add new category and rules for persons as I and you.

I operate on my own code that goes far beyond what the rules cover.

It aligns pretty well with the rules and I don''t get my hand slapped to often so it works.

I have created over the years my own position that doesn''t fit into any one category.

No matter what I end up doing my heart will always be with the consumers of PS.

My first duty will be to them on PS.

karl, if you have reported me and complained about me, yet somehow I''m still here, maybe you''re not happy wth the way PS is being run.

It''s a big internet out there- why don''t you start a forum about diamonds, and exclude experts!

THis way you could give any advice and never have to listen to someone who can show that in addition to the good advice you have given, some of your advice may have actually hurt a consumer- to say nothing of the evil, lowdown jewelers- but of course who cares about them, their families or communities.


Marion could hop on board and give her online therapy sessions too!

.........................................

 

[Black Jade]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:57:34 AM
Author: Moh 10

Date: 7/28/2009 9:46:13 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 7/28/2009 6:58:50 AM

Author: Serg



Karl,


I am strongly disagree .

Consumers can not receive good service and well balanced advices if vendors have not protection from false and vulgar consumers(bias) attacks

Hi Seg,


I have been thinking about what you''ve said here. Some of us have posted how we view David and his site. Because you don''t agree with us, that automatically makes everything we''ve said/feel false? Is that what you''re saying?


I gave a background on my previous jeweler experiences. I then gave examples of what David has done that has fed my cynicism with him. I wasn''t trying to be vindictive or attack him, I was being honest. I was trying to make him understand why I feel the way I do. How can that be ''wrong''?

Serg is one of those types.
He is either a scientist, engineer, mathematician etc.
They are highly educated and live in a world of ''prove it or it isn''t so''.
Unfortunately they apply this college debate team logic to everything.

Opinions and feelings are foreign to them.
They live in a world of facts.
Sometimes I wonder if they even realize they have opinions.

I don''t mean to be critical, just observant.
I worked in an engineering environment for decades and saw this all the time.
That said, these are wonderful people.
They are essential to progress in technical fields.

I think Serge was not saying that Ellen was wrong.

Ellen wrote a reasoned post giving concrete examples of things that RD had written and done that she was not in agreement with, and gave the reasons why she did not agree with them. Her post was clearly in no way a personal attack and could not be read as such by any sane person. Writing such a post also gave him an opportunity to respond, which is fair and just. I do not see their disagreement as being finished yet and I do not have the technical knowledge to decide who is ''right''(if either one actually is and it is not a matter on which there can be different opinions) but reading their give and take was educational and interesting.

I am not a scientist. I am not an engineer. I am an ex-college professor, but I was in a much more subjective field, history. But although history is subjective and the historian ultimately gives his or her opinion, we try to have it based on facts and THOUGH WE DO HAVE FEELINGS, which influence our decision, what we do is try to put our biases out front so that the people we are presenting to can know them and account for them, in making their own decisions. At least, that''s how I was trained. When I was teaching women''s history, for instance, I would always say to my students, obviously you can see that I''m a woman and so automatically there is a certain bias here, and I have certain experiences which I am also bringing to the table, when you listen to me, take those into account. I woiuld also defer to the experts. When I had to teach military history, for instance, as part of my course, I would go and check my impressions with the guy who had been trained in military and had been reading it for twenty years before I gave my lecture. Sometimes, I would just simply invite him (this was a man at my college) to give a guest lecture, when I felt that what he was saying was so complex that he would just simply do a better job (and I was often asked to guest lecture in complex subjects that I knew a lot about--my specialty was Chinese which few in the department had any background in at all and they''d ask me rather than say, try to read up on it quickly and make mistakes).

I do bring that background that I have to the discussion, of course. I bring it everywhere. I cannot help this.

You(not you personally, but people in general) make a poor impression, on others, not just ''scientists and engineers and logical types'' when you say things you cannot prove, when pressed; even more when you switch to attacking someone personally when asked to give proof and become very emotional in those attacks; the fact that a large group of people is saying the same thing is not convincing when none of them can explain the reasoning behind this opininion coherently, and it becomes that much less convincing when they turn as a group and all attack a single individual who is questioning them. This is not exactly what has happened here. Ellen, and some others, have given reasons to explain what they are saying. RD has not come across as a perfect person, and as I said, I am still reserving my final opinion (and I bet a lot of the 6,600 readers are, also)--the only conclusion I have come to so far is that the act of judging diamonds cannot simply be reduced to numbers (but I have not come to a conclusion as to if there is anything else that can be put in its place).

If it made a poor impression on me personally, Moh, (I don''t speak for anyone else here) when someone who is in the profession of psychology (I don''t know if Marian is a psychiatrist, a psychologist, a counselor, or what--''therapist'' means a lot of things) gave a psychological analysis (and a cruel one) of someone they had never met, based on posts written quickly online, all on an emotional subject that they did not agree with the person on--you know it makes an even poorer if those who don''t have ANY training in this area start throwing psycho-babble around and attaching it to the person they disagree with, as you did not in this post but in the last one you sent. I don''t want to be mean, as I said, I don''t know if I''m on your ''side'' or not (since there clearly two ''sides'' here) but I don''t think you''re going to be able to escape the truth that you ARE going to have to ultimately be able to use a little ''college debate team logic'' and come up with some proof and facts, not just for Sergey but some others of us who are non-scientists, also.

 

[Serg]

I saw many nice diamonds which are ugly in ASET\IS. WF, Infinity are not sell such type diamonds. Only persons as David could seel its. If you bash persons as David who will suggest such option for PS consumers. Why do you have rights to reject such choice for others, why do you promote double standards for PS
You demand responsibility for David and limitations for his opinions on PS and in same time you defense your freedom publish your negative statements without links to any facts. such weak practics destroy PS in long perspective.
Karl is proud what he follows his internal rules and reject same for David.

Double standards

 

[risingsun]

Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member of the family needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don't have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

To David: Please do not miscontrue that my comments resemble a therapy session. These are my observations.

 

[Lula]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:27:45 AM
Author: Black Jade

Date: 7/27/2009 11:30:26 PM

I think Picasso once said about art that first you needed to learn all the rules and then you needed to learn how they could be broken. I wouldn't want to take this particular analogy too far, but I don't think it's unreasonable to consider the possibility that someone who doesn't follow the rule book by the letter, yet still has the respect of their peers (at least so far as their work is concerned) may not necessarily be a charlatan.

Black Jade, you are a wonderful writer and such a diplomat! I enjoy reading your posts. I loved the quote above, but IMHO it is not a great analogy in this case. I first heard this quote in art class, many years ago, when a professor was explaining why it is important to first learn to draw correctly, i.e., learning about perspective and depth perception and foreshortening, before attempting to draw abstractly. He gave Picasso as an example of someone who had mastered the rules and then chose to break those rules in order to create his abstract pieces.

Many artists and many scientists and innovators have used this "learn the rules to break the rules" method to develop some of the innovations we take for granted, whether it's in art or technology. Karl is a perfect example of someone who has learned everything he can about cut, and lighting, and performance tools and is using what he learned to innovate in the areas of measuring virtual facets, and eventually, I believe, diamond design.

In this case, I see RD as flouting the rules to promote his own agenda rather than learning the rules and then breaking them in order to innovate. This causes an expected flap, which he gets some sort of psychic kick out of, and then he comes back to stick the knife in again. After he is suitably called on the carpet for his rudeness, he apologizes and the PS community moves on. Then the whole cycle repeats itself.

I see him as an agitator with his own agenda, quite frankly, who has no desire to move the PS community forward and generate discussion that will advance our common knowledge about what makes a diamond beautiful, and how to convey that to consumers.

And I didn't used to think this way about RD; just like risingsun, I was neutral about RD when I first came on as a member of PS a few months ago. I don't think he should be banned, but certainly his possible motives should be exposed.

For example, I ask you to think about what purpose this thread has served RD and his business: With over 7,000 hits in 5 days, surely some of those visitors to this thread have visited RD's site, too, to see what the fuss is all about. A pretty cheap way to generate a huge amount of potential business his way, me thinks.

I do NOT see him as an innocent victim, sorry. Rather, he's quite a saavy businessman.

 

[risingsun]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:11:19 PM
Author: sarap333

Date: 7/28/2009 11:27:45 AM
Author: Black Jade

Date: 7/27/2009 11:30:26 PM

I think Picasso once said about art that first you needed to learn all the rules and then you needed to learn how they could be broken. I wouldn't want to take this particular analogy too far, but I don't think it's unreasonable to consider the possibility that someone who doesn't follow the rule book by the letter, yet still has the respect of their peers (at least so far as their work is concerned) may not necessarily be a charlatan.

Black Jade, you are a wonderful writer and such a diplomat! I enjoy reading your posts. I loved the quote above, but IMHO it is not a great analogy in this case. I first heard this quote in art class, many years ago, when a professor was explaining why it is important to first learn to draw correctly, i.e., learning about perspective and depth perception and foreshortening, before attempting to draw abstractly. He gave Picasso as an example of someone who had mastered the rules and then chose to break those rules in order to create his abstract pieces.

Many artists and many scientists and innovators have used this 'learn the rules to break the rules' method to develop some of the innovations we take for granted, whether it's in art or technology. Karl is a perfect example of someone who has learned everything he can about cut, and lighting, and performance tools

In this case, I see RD as flouting the rules to promote his own agenda rather than learning the rules and then breaking them in order to innovate. This causes an expected flap, which he gets some sort of psychic kick out of, and then he comes back to stick the knife in again. After he is suitably called on the carpet for his rudeness, he apologizes and the PS community moves on. Then the whole cycle repeats itself.

I see him as an agitator with his own agenda, quite frankly, who has no desire to move the PS community forward and generate discussion that will advance our common knowledge about what makes a diamond beautiful, and how to convey that to consumers.

And I didn't used to think this way about RD; just like risingsun, I was neutral about RD when I first came on as a member of PS a few months ago

But now I ask you to think what purpose this thread has served RD: With over 7,000 hits in 5 days, surely some of those visitors to this thread have visited RD's site, too, to see what the fuss is all about. A pretty cheap way to generate a huge amount of potential business his way, me thinks.

I do see him as an innocent victim, sorry. Rather, he's quite a saavy businessman.

Thank you for your thoughts, sara. In your last sentence, did you mean to say that you do not see him as an innocent victim? Just to clarify...

 

[Lula]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:16:13 PM
Author: risingsun



I do see him as an innocent victim, sorry. Rather, he's quite a saavy businessman.

Thank you for your thoughts, sara. In your last sentence, did you mean to say that you do not see him as an innocent victim? Just to clarify...

Thanks, Marian, for catching that. I just edited my post. I DO NOT see him as an innocent victim. Quite the contrary!

 

[Black Jade]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don''t have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

I don''t know you, so I neither like or dislike you. I believe that you wish the best for the forum. I do disagree, however, quite strongly with the tactics you used. I know that people in the psychiatry profession have done a lot of good to me and my family and I am sure that you have also done good in your 20 years of experience, in person. However, I can''t think you can be accurate at all, diagnosing someone online in the way you have done with David. I do think that the way you phrased your initial comments about him was quite cruel (though this may not have been your intention) and most of all, I think that is really crossing a line when you do what you have done, especially because although you are misusing your profession, your credentials give you credibility, as others who disagree with David can then say, "see, I was right, even the psychiatrist thinks he''s crazy (or disturbed or whatever) and SHE must know." And anyone else who wishes to do so can chime in and the issue then becomes not whether David is correct or incorrect, and not even whether David is actually disruptive or not, but whether David is sane.

Which is so obviously unfair that I can''t believe that you can''t see this on your own without having it spelled out.

To clarify, I think you are perfectly within your rights to say that you believe that David is disruptive on this forum but you are NOT right to ''attempt to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors'' without his having asked you to do and I repeat, I do not believe that you can analyze David on-line and I think that you should not give the impression that it is possible for you to do so. This dialogue that we are having just needs to be on a whole other level.

I''m losing my temper here and that''s not right, so I''m going to leave for a bit. Best to you all.

 

[Amethyste]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:29:06 PM
Author: Black Jade

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don''t have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

I don''t know you, so I neither like or dislike you. I believe that you wish the best for the forum. I do disagree, however, quite strongly with the tactics you used. I know that people in the psychiatry profession have done a lot of good to me and my family and I am sure that you have also done good in your 20 years of experience, in person. However, I can''t think you can be accurate at all, diagnosing someone online in the way you have done with David. I do think that the way you phrased your initial comments about him was quite cruel (though this may not have been your intention) and most of all, I think that is really crossing a line when you do what you have done, especially because although you are misusing your profession, your credentials give you credibility, as others who disagree with David can then say, ''see, I was right, even the psychiatrist thinks he''s crazy (or disturbed or whatever) and SHE must know.'' And anyone else who wishes to do so can chime in and the issue then becomes not whether David is correct or incorrect, and not even whether David is actually disruptive or not, but whether David is sane.

Which is so obviously unfair that I can''t believe that you can''t see this on your own without having it spelled out.

To clarify, I think you are perfectly within your rights to say that you believe that David is disruptive on this forum but you are NOT right to ''attempt to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors'' without his having asked you to do and I repeat, I do not believe that you can analyze David on-line and I think that you should not give the impression that it is possible for you to do so. This dialogue that we are having just needs to be on a whole other level.

I''m losing my temper here and that''s not right, so I''m going to leave for a bit. Best to you all.

BlackJade - I think you are touching the right base with your post.

 

[Lula]

"Sanity" like "brilliance" and "fire" and "scintillation" has a very specific definition. I don''t think RisingSun was questioning RD''s sanity.

 

[Black Jade]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:11:19 PM
Author: sarap333

Date: 7/28/2009 11:27:45 AM
Author: Black Jade

Date: 7/27/2009 11:30:26 PM

I think Picasso once said about art that first you needed to learn all the rules and then you needed to learn how they could be broken. I wouldn''t want to take this particular analogy too far, but I don''t think it''s unreasonable to consider the possibility that someone who doesn''t follow the rule book by the letter, yet still has the respect of their peers (at least so far as their work is concerned) may not necessarily be a charlatan.

Black Jade, you are a wonderful writer and such a diplomat! I enjoy reading your posts. I loved the quote above, but IMHO it is not a great analogy in this case. I first heard this quote in art class, many years ago, when a professor was explaining why it is important to first learn to draw correctly, i.e., learning about perspective and depth perception and foreshortening, before attempting to draw abstractly. He gave Picasso as an example of someone who had mastered the rules and then chose to break those rules in order to create his abstract pieces.

Many artists and many scientists and innovators have used this ''learn the rules to break the rules'' method to develop some of the innovations we take for granted, whether it''s in art or technology. Karl is a perfect example of someone who has learned everything he can about cut, and lighting, and performance tools and is using what he learned to innovate in the areas of measuring virtual facets, and eventually, I believe, diamond design.

In this case, I see RD as flouting the rules to promote his own agenda rather than learning the rules and then breaking them in order to innovate. This causes an expected flap, which he gets some sort of psychic kick out of, and then he comes back to stick the knife in again. After he is suitably called on the carpet for his rudeness, he apologizes and the PS community moves on. Then the whole cycle repeats itself.

I see him as an agitator with his own agenda, quite frankly, who has no desire to move the PS community forward and generate discussion that will advance our common knowledge about what makes a diamond beautiful, and how to convey that to consumers.

And I didn''t used to think this way about RD; just like risingsun, I was neutral about RD when I first came on as a member of PS a few months ago. I don''t think he should be banned, but certainly his possible motives should be exposed.

For example, I ask you to think about what purpose this thread has served RD and his business: With over 7,000 hits in 5 days, surely some of those visitors to this thread have visited RD''s site, too, to see what the fuss is all about. A pretty cheap way to generate a huge amount of potential business his way, me thinks.

I do NOT see him as an innocent victim, sorry. Rather, he''s quite a saavy businessman.

Was going to leave and then I saw this post by SaraP. Maybe you''re right and maybe you''re wrong. I don''t know RD personally, certainly. I have not been as interested in defending a particular person or a particular point of view as I have been in seeing the discussion stay on track and seeing the very interesting questions about the future of this forum and about how to widen the parameters about how we judge diamonds.

I really do have steam coming out of my ears because of Marian''s posts however at the moment and I don''t think that when I have lost my temper to this extent, I have anything valuable to contribute, so its PAX for the moment. I hope you guys continue with the discussion, hopefully with the discussion at its best, when it isn''t personal--I may come back letter.

I repeat, best to you all.

 

[oldminer]

If a participant on Pricescope claims to have a method for selection of the nicest looking diamonds, everyone become highly interested in finding out much more about this methodology. If the method is subjective, only based on years of experience and cannot be communicated in some systematic way for distant Pricescopers to take advantage of in their own buying process, it has minimal to no importance for most readers. It could mean something for those willing to place their purchase descision in the hands of the person offering to select the stone for them, but being just subjective, there will never be any facts offered to back up the claim of actually getting a wonderfully brilliant and "best" looking diamond. You are left in the hands of the seller, period.

Probably there are a few folks who would like such an easy way to buy the diamond and get it over with. But, I suspect the vast majority would prefer the many more factual methods touted on Pricescope as real aids in buying diamonds independently and with self learned knowledge. I don''t see Pricescope itself as having an agenda or bias. People come here primarily to learn how to buy a diamond. They find there is a whole lot to the process if one wishes to make the purchase based on data, tools, facts and knowledge. They also have the equal opportunity to simply select a diamond from one of the many great vendors here offering diamonds and buy it absolutely blindly. Pricescope is not forcing this on anyone, either way.

What needs to happen is keeping the discussion civil, respectful and appropriate to a sales floor and a place of learning. No yelling at one another, no accusations, no name calling, no hyperbole, and factually based. This thread has gone over the edge in several places, yet it has been highly popular. I think it has been ultimately damaging to a couple participants who may reap some very limited benefits from negativity, but overall, the thread has not damaged Pricescope or the many good people who participate. As usual, the good people will reap the long term rewards of participation and those who are the most offended, most indignant and most self-righteous will end up looking rather like court jesters. It is kind of cool how fair this ultimately is to everyone. Each of us has our own opinion at the end of the process and the majority will benefit from the education.

Expressing biased points of view makes for good reading and even greater debates. Not everything found in cyberspace or written on paper is true. Learning how to find the truth behind the words is key to untangling and dis-empowering the effects of bias. To that end, I believe we have done a decent job here although a few may still feel unhappy about some aspect of the discussion.

 

[Rockdiamond]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member of the family needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don't have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

To David: Please do not miscontrue that my comments resemble a therapy session. These are my observations.

Black Jade- you have your second marriage proposal.

HI Marian,
How about this...everyone knows who I am.
You claim to be a mental health professional- of course we don't know that for sure.
Why don't you list your real name and we can ask some of the people you work with to comment on what you've been doing in this thread and if you relating your profession with my posts is ethical, or even legal?

Also Marion., would you care to post some of the neutral comments you've made about me?
You've said you were neutral before.
I can only remember nasty attacks coming from you.

 

[Serg]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:29:06 PM
Author: Black Jade

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don't have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

I don't know you, so I neither like or dislike you. I believe that you wish the best for the forum. I do disagree, however, quite strongly with the tactics you used. I know that people in the psychiatry profession have done a lot of good to me and my family and I am sure that you have also done good in your 20 years of experience, in person. However, I can't think you can be accurate at all, diagnosing someone online in the way you have done with David. I do think that the way you phrased your initial comments about him was quite cruel (though this may not have been your intention) and most of all, I think that is really crossing a line when you do what you have done, especially because although you are misusing your profession, your credentials give you credibility, as others who disagree with David can then say, 'see, I was right, even the psychiatrist thinks he's crazy (or disturbed or whatever) and SHE must know.' And anyone else who wishes to do so can chime in and the issue then becomes not whether David is correct or incorrect, and not even whether David is actually disruptive or not, but whether David is sane.

Which is so obviously unfair that I can't believe that you can't see this on your own without having it spelled out.

To clarify, I think you are perfectly within your rights to say that you believe that David is disruptive on this forum but you are NOT right to 'attempt to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors' without his having asked you to do and I repeat, I do not believe that you can analyze David on-line and I think that you should not give the impression that it is possible for you to do so. This dialogue that we are having just needs to be on a whole other level.

I'm losing my temper here and that's not right, so I'm going to leave for a bit. Best to you all.

Black Jade,
Thanks for your post on PS, i feel same as you but has not ability to write so cleare posts as you.

 

[risingsun]

I will reread my posts, BlackJade and see if I have overstepped my boundaries. I was very careful not to make a diagnosis, because that would have been unethical. I don''t think that asking David to look at his own behavior crosses the line. He has received feedback, from many posters, about his disruptive behavior before I ever posted in this thread. PS is a consumer advocate site. I believe, in this thread, we have been advocating for the consumer on a professional [diamond knowledge] and personal [interpersonal communication] level about the damage that David has caused to this site.

 

[Black Jade]

Come back LATER.
I really know I''ve lost it when I start to make mistakes like this.

 

[risingsun]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:43:28 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member of the family needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don''t have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

To David: Please do not miscontrue that my comments resemble a therapy session. These are my observations.

Black Jade- you have your second marriage proposal.

HI Marian,
How about this...everyone knows who I am.
You claim to be a mental health professional- of course we don''t know that for sure.
Why don''t you list your real name and we can ask some of the people you work with to comment on what you''ve been doing in this thread and if you relating your profession with my posts is ethical, or even legal?

Also Marion., would you care to post some of the neutral comments you''ve made about me?
You''ve said you were neutral before.
I can only remember nasty attacks coming from you.

I don''t respond well to threats. I''m done with you, David.

 

[Lula]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:42:15 PM
Author: oldminer
If a participant on Pricescope claims to have a method for selection of the nicest looking diamonds, everyone become highly interested in finding out much more about this methodology. If the method is subjective, only based on years of experience and cannot be communicated in some systematic way for distant Pricescopers to take advantage of in their own buying process, it has minimal to no importance for most readers. It could mean something for those willing to place their purchase descision in the hands of the person offering to select the stone for them, but being just subjective, there will never be any facts offered to back up the claim of actually getting a wonderfully brilliant and ''best'' looking diamond. You are left in the hands of the seller, period.


Probably there are a few folks who would like such an easy way to buy the diamond and get it over with. But, I suspect the vast majority would prefer the many more factual methods touted on Pricescope as real aids in buying diamonds independently and with self learned knowledge. I don''t see Pricescope itself as having an agenda or bias. People come here primarily to learn how to buy a diamond. They find there is a whole lot to the process if one wishes to make the purchase based on data, tools, facts and knowledge. They also have the equal opportunity to simply select a diamond from one of the many great vendors here offering diamonds and buy it absolutely blindly. Pricescope is not forcing this on anyone, either way.


What needs to happen is keeping the discussion civil, respectful and appropriate to a sales floor and a place of learning. No yelling at one another, no accusations, no name calling, no hyperbole, and factually based. This thread has gone over the edge in several places, yet it has been highly popular. I think it has been ultimately damaging to a couple participants who may reap some very limited benefits from negativity, but overall, the thread has not damaged Pricescope or the many good people who participate. As usual, the good people will reap the long term rewards of participation and those who are the most offended, most indignant and most self-righteous will end up looking rather like court jesters. It is kind of cool how fair this ultimately is to everyone. Each of us has our own opinion at the end of the process and the majority will benefit from the education.


Expressing biased points of view makes for good reading and even greater debates. Not everything found in cyberspace or written on paper is true. Learning how to find the truth behind the words is key to untangling and dis-empowering the effects of bias. To that end, I believe we have done a decent job here although a few may still feel unhappy about some aspect of the discussion.

The court jesters may convince the internet audience that the Emporor is wearing no clothes, too.

 

[Rockdiamond]

SERG!!
I have not taken the time to thank you profusely ( a whole lot) for being willing to stand for what you believe to be right.
Richard, you as well.
Judah- you as well.

This really isn''t consumer versus trade. It''s CLOSED MIND BIAS against open minded conversation.

Let''s again look at Ellen''s commentary on our site.
There was not ONE issue raised that had any deficit in either gemological accuracy, nor shoddy business practices.
I would so love to have any such errors pointed out to me.
In fact, here''s a chance to make some money guys.
I hope this is cool with PS mgmt, otherwise I''ll gladly remove it.
I''ll pay $10 per error found on our website.
I''m not talking about differences of opinion- you don''t like the way I described a diamond or ring- rather factual gemological errors or policies stated that may be, in any way, detrimental to the consumer.

We''ll need to have a third party who''s knowledgeable and impartial ( such as Rich) to verify that we have indeed made such an error.
It''s totally possible they might exist as the site is written by hand.

Suggestions such as "Show a badly cut stone to demonstrate a well cut one" are great! I don''t choose to work that way as I don''t spend any time with cutters producing badly cut diamonds.
However, if that is what you want, there certainly ARE site that demonstrate using such techniques.
Suggesting that I need to change our site - which has gotten tens of thousands of letters telling us how much people love it- because some posters here prefer a different style? I don''t think so.

 

[Rockdiamond]

.....

 

[Rockdiamond]

Interesting Marion, YOU come here, make claims cloaked in what you claim to be your profession, then when challenged, you run away.
Thanks for the input!

 

[DiamondFlame]

Black Jade, your posts are God-sent. I can't thank you enough for bringing such a balanced, well reasoned view point to this heated thread. PS certainly needs more people like you around.

Date: 7/28/2009 6:48:47 AM
Author: strmrdr

This thread is a perfect example.
Look at how many trade members are rallying around Davids mistreatment of consumers.
To be fair there are a large number who oppose it also.

Strm, you really need to be careful before making libellous statements like these, esp in written form. Others have been sued for less.
Who and just where are these 'mistreated' consumers? I certainly wd like to hear what they have to say.

Btw those who think they are safe hiding behind pseudonyms and the cloak of apparent anonimity afforded by the internet shd think harder before putting words online. There's a real business at stake here. Just because someone has less to lose here doesn't give him/her the right to cast aspersions on another's business practices.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

I'm just a collector with no professional experience, background or GG degree - I have never worked in the industry and I don't consider myself a prosumer.

But

I have a method for selecting the best looking diamonds: my eyesight.

When a stone looks great to me, I'll buy it regardless of what all the reports, calculators and scopes in the world say about it because they are only guidelines. I base my decisions on what I see.

Consumers should definitely do as much reading and research as their time allows, but the best research is to look at as many stones as possible and select the ones that talk to you.

 

[sofi]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:49:10 PM
Author: risingsun

Date: 7/28/2009 1:43:28 PM
Author: Rockdiamond

Date: 7/28/2009 1:08:13 PM
Author: risingsun
Since you asked, Black Jade, I am a Licensed Professional Counselor with the privilege to practice independently in my state. I have 20 years of experience in my field. I have worked with families, individuals and groups. Each member of the family needs to be committed to change, regardless how painful the process becomes. In your situation, this was able to happen. There are clients who are not able to work through their issues in therapy. They usually self terminate. I do not terminate them without a lot of thought, peer supervision and/or clinical supervision. I have attempted to ask David to look at himself and his behaviors, which have been disruptive to this forum, since his return. There are better ways to communicate than the methods he has chosen. You don''t have to like me or my comments, but I felt that I could not stand by and do nothing.

To David: Please do not miscontrue that my comments resemble a therapy session. These are my observations.

Black Jade- you have your second marriage proposal.

HI Marian,
How about this...everyone knows who I am.
You claim to be a mental health professional- of course we don''t know that for sure.
Why don''t you list your real name and we can ask some of the people you work with to comment on what you''ve been doing in this thread and if you relating your profession with my posts is ethical, or even legal?

Also Marion., would you care to post some of the neutral comments you''ve made about me?
You''ve said you were neutral before.
I can only remember nasty attacks coming from you.

I don''t respond well to threats. I''m done with you, David.

I have read this thread from start to finish. As a relative newcomer I cannot take sides, although I am glad to see that others are bothered by the unneccessarily rude remarks made towards RD on this and other threads. I am really puzzled by this particular one, though, because I read and reread the quoted part and could not find any evidence of a "threat."

 

[Rockdiamond]

HI David Atlas,
One of CCl posts a few years..I mean days ago contained this suggestion:

I am sure by now you have taken a look at thousands of certificates and or sarins reports on diamonds you particularly liked and considered the ones that fell outside of the "ideal safe" ranges. We want to be be primarily educated here on Pricescope forums the buying aspect is secondary, however you can do both if you provide information and put effort into explaining why these diamonds that fall outside of the ranges are good performers. Beyond the certificate number there must be a story as to why these stones perform well and the sarin numbers would confirm this and allow you to find other stones like them. At the very least we would understand the logic of your approach, and it might lead to a whole lot more internet business being brought your way.

I found it encouraging as it seemed - at least at the time- that CCL had taken a more open minded approasch...oh well.

But as far as the suggestion and how it relates to what David Atlas said:
CCL_ I don''t routinely run Sarin reports on stones we buy.
If I did, and notated all the CA/PA etc...it would help not one whit in trying to replicate the ones I loved.
I can just picture this phone call:
"Hi Mr well known and amazing Diamond Cutter, It''s Rockdiamond. Do you have a stone that''s #$$% this and ^&^*# % that?"
If you''re searching on an online DB, maybe they list stones on that basis.
If we''re talking abut .50 G/SI1''s- maybe there''s even enough of them on the lists to buy that way.
If it''s a 2.00ct G/SI1, that is a totally different story.
The rough for larger stones is so expensive that the best cutters have developed methods for prodicing beautiful stones, while maintaining profitability.
When you paint everyone in the diamond/jewelry business as money hungry people , remember that if there was no profit, there''d be no diamonds to cut.

I agree with David Atals that technology HAS made a huge difference in the diamond business. However my position is that the effcts of things like ASET/IS are far less than the advnaces made in computer modeling of the rough, for example.

 

[denverappraiser]

My how this thread has digressed. It’s gone from an important and interesting discussion on bias by advisors to one of whether David’s NY manners and the fact that he disagrees with the generally accepted approach used here to select diamonds is grounds to eject him. It’s a pity. The first few pages of this thread were really good. Less so the last few.

Neil Beaty
GG(GIA) ICGA(AGS) NAJA
Professional Appraisals in Denver