Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

[Michael Semann]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Why thank you Sean. Say weren't you put on probation once for unconstructive, trite little armchair criticisms such as that?

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Vendors

Hallo Kameraden!

"For me personally, I hold the view that the AC Forum moderators do not, in the totality and completeness required:

1. Possess private collections large enough or have access enough to public ones,
2. Possess the knowledge on every aspect of Civil War material culture,
3. Possess the reference materials and libraries,
4. Possess the physical time,
5. Possess the means and mechanisms to obtain, review, publish, and return EVERY reproduced item from EVERY current or would-be vendor or maker,

in order to make this work fairly, effectively, and efficiently."

Even though we Moderators are endowed and embued by the AC Forum and Personal Life with many god-like powers of omniscience as well as and vast and disproportionately infinite power- I am not sure, I for one, can rise above the above quote to fullfill that expectation or expectancy.
(and, is that the "job" of moderators when the "experts" can debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin- and get different answers?)

And, as mentioned, what about "agendas?"
What if I, personally, feel I cannot approve ANY vendor's federal fatigue blouses because they do not meet my personal standards because they are not dyed with indigo? (Just to throw something out...)
Meaning, by whose collective standards do, and can, should, the Mods evaluate objectively?

In some ways, many ways, this "Approved Vendor" concept is great in concept, but a Frankenstein monster in the end.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
In Vendor Veritas Mess

[JimKindred]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Let me throw this one out, would the readers of this thread perfer to do away with the approved vendor system and each individual pay a subscription fee to be able to participate on this forum?

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Vendors

Hallo Kameraden!

I cannot, and am not, speaking for Paul, or the AC Forum here...

Was not that how the AC Forum operated and ran for several years BEFORE the concept and practice of charging of vendors?

I donate and have donated to this forum , and would "subscribe," yes.
(but even if charged, I believe "readers" can still read this forum for free, just not post without being a "member," as they do now anyways.)

And secondly...

I believe, for the majority of the AC Forum membership and viewership- that they would not like to see, or vote for "Approved Vendor" to be discontinued as it (inspite of mistakes and flaws) provides not only a valuable "service," if you will, in directing potential customers to potential suppliers, but also serves as a discussion venue, as well as offering a measure of "assurance" if not true "insurance" that a potential buyer is getting the "best bang for his/her buck" (at least according to the best of ability and the Hinge Point of what is currently 'hailed' or 'accepted' at the H/A End of the CW Community.
(And that would include on-forum discussions of quality vendors or makers who happpen NOT to be on the List, as well as PM and e-mail discussions behind the scenes...)

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Just an AC Forum Member Mess

[SCSecesh]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Let me throw this one out, would the readers of this thread perfer to do away with the approved vendor system and each individual pay a subscription fee to be able to participate on this forum?

It seems you have missed the point! It does not appear that anyone has advocated the end of the "Approved Vendor" listing. The points have been made that there are vendors who for whatever reason choose not to participate in that worthy cause, BUT who still produce goods of "authentic" quality. I've never seen discussion on these vendors quelled on this board, but with the huge traffic this board sees among those who are seeking "more light" the idea (that some may hold) that ONLY the vendors on this list produce authentic goods is a misnomer!
On the other hand, in response to your question and as Curt so aptly put, it was that way at least in one incarnation in the past.

[JimKindred]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

I didn't miss the point at all if you take a bit of time to read the previous posts that I have added to this thread I believe you will see that. I threw that last post out to see what the reaction would be nothing more. I know very well it worked as you describe in the past, I was on the forum in the beginning.

The main objection to the whole approved vendor thing seems to be what it is called. Shoot, call it what you want. :wink_smil However I know that no matter what is done some will still bitch if their favorite vendor is not on the list.

If individuals feel strongly that a certain vendor should be on the list, don't waste time posting here, contact that vendor and encourage them to be on the list.

[Jeffrey Przewozniak]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Hi everyone,

I would very much like to see a list of ALL vendors/makers whose goods are up to par, much like on the old site. When the subscription fee thing came about, I felt a little different, considering that making authentic goods wasn't enough anymore, you now have to pay up to get on the coveted "list."

Don't get me wrong, I think the vendors on the current list probably make great stuff, and there are many to choose from. However, it seems like it has gone from a free, no restrictions, honest evaluation of products to a pay thing. In the end, I think that all vendors should be on a reccomended list like the old site, and those who pay should get advertising rights. To limit our only "list" here to the ones who pay seems like an injustice done to the authentic community. Why not make another one? I am in earnest,

[paulcalloway]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Hi everyone,

I think that all vendors should be on a reccomended list like the old site, and those who pay should get advertising rights. To limit our only "list" here to the ones who pay seems like an injustice done to the authentic community. Why not make another one? I am in earnest,

I know the guy who made that old list you refer to and I have to say, it was an absolute nightmare to maintain. It was entirely subjective because there's no way you can be familiar with everyone's products. It was constantly outdated because there's no way one person can keep up with all of these vendors going in and out of business, changing emails, phone numbers, etc etc. It was absolutely frustrating because as soon as I'd add a vendor who claimed to be making authentic goods, I'd get 5 emails telling me what a farb I was for allowing this or that vendor to be on the list.

That list was not the holy grail - not by a long shot. And I don't have the time, desire or patience to ever attempt that sort of thing again.

The Civil War authentic goods market is driven by free market forces and competition just like most economic marketplaces. If people want exposure, they need to pay for it. Socialist systems leave everybody broke.

There are sutlerly businesses who for years have made a lot of money off of this site... in some cases they can attribute almost 100% of their business from coming from this site, why shouldn't they share a portion of those dollars with the site that is promoting them?

The system we have now is a major improvement on the one we used to have and as we've said over and over... nothing is stopping other vendors from getting involved.

Believe me, these lists are great until you're the guy putting it together.

[dave81276]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Would it really cost that much to change the letters "A-P-P-R-O-V-E-D" to "R-E-C-O-M-M-E-N-D-E-D"? Adding the moderately larger authenticated vendor section would take time and effort, but I think it would be worthwhile and constructive for us "unwashed masses". Besides, I have to say that I wouldn't mind a moderate monthly subscription price for this site, considering the great stuff I learn here.

-Dave Eggleston

[paulcalloway]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Approved vs. Recommended - a matter of symantics. I'm not much for political correctness. We'll bat it around.

The new database should help a great deal and we're discussing the best ways to allow non-member, non-approved, non-recommended vendors to be discussed here without offending or discouraging the vendors who pay the bills and without open the doors to farbonzo vendors and their ridiculous products.

The site used to be paid for by an affiliate program of sorts - Glenn Jones footed the bill and in turn we sent him folks looking to build websites for their units and businesses. Now we're having to pay our own bills, and with monthly hosting, software licenses, support and other such needs... it gets expensive.

I like having vendors pay a portion and most of them want to pay - they graciously accept the responsibility. Many of them were already contributing before we went to the paid subscription service. Now it's just more official.

[coffee boiler]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Another option is to just refer to them as "sponsors"

[SCSecesh]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

Paul can call them "The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" if he wants (if it's not already copyrighted!!), but what you call them is not the point! A brief explanation of what they are would be much more helpful to those that are still "guests" or newbies to this forum.
Many of us here that have posted replys know who makes what and their reputation for quality, EVEN IF they aren't on "The List." My concern is for the unwashed masses that are still seeking "light."

[CJDaley]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

My concern is for the unwashed masses that are still seeking "light."

At the risk of alienating my fellow Approved Vendors I submit the following.....

I do not believe we should censor names of authentic non-approved vendors as if they were vulgar words. I wouldn’t want to see a quote like: "I think C**nty Cl*th" makes authentic fabric, but I also believe that B*n T*rt" makes equally good fabric."

I think there is a way to answer a question regarding a non-approved vendor’s authenticity, while still supporting the AC Vendors. I personally recommend authentic non-Approved vendors to my customers when they are looking for items that I either don’t carry or don’t have in stock. If you did a search on these forums you’ll see that I have even supported and recommended authentic non-Approved vendors on this forum.

I gave money to the forums before my name was highlighted in green not because I wanted special treatment, but because I felt that the financial burden of these forums should fall to those who stand to benefit the most: da skinners. Paul and the staff of the AC Forums have supported the approved vendors, have allowed us unbridled advertising capabilities and have given us benefits way beyond what other forums (or hobby publications) have offered us. In return, we pay a very small fee in an attempt to defray the cost to the other 2,700 members and we try to contribute to threads with primary source info (where we can).

I’m sure my fellow vendors would agree that a knowledgeable customer is a happy customer and asking questions is the best way of learning. I’m not afraid of my customers asking about authentic non-approved vendors and I would argue that EVERY member of this forum has a garment in their closet made from fabric sold by a non approved vendor (as none of the big three weavers in the hobby are approved members.)

In short, let’s allow the free exchange of information to flow. Let’s support our vendors where possible while still keeping authentic non-approved vendors in the discussions and threads. (non-authentic non-approved vendors are another story)

[SCSecesh]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

At the risk of alienating my fellow Approved Vendors I submit the following.....

I do not believe we should censor names of authentic non-approved vendors as if they were vulgar words. I wouldn’t to see a quote like: "I think C**nty Cl*th" makes authentic fabric, but I also believe that B*n T*rt" makes equally good fabric."

In short, let’s allow the free exchange of information to flow. Let’s support our vendors where possible while still keeping authentic authentic non-approved vendors in the discussions and threads. (non-authentic non-approved vendors are another story)

Now those are words of a gentleman!! Good job, Chris!!

[PvtSchultz]

Re: Questions About Non-Approved Venndors

I believe we have arrived at a point where I can honestly say the horse has been beaten to death.

I can very well understand everyone's opinion when it comes to "approved, not approved, etc," but the bottum line is the vendors listed are the ones that a) support this forum, b) support preservation projects, c) make damm good stuff and d) are looking for some advertising space. I for one look at these vendors as "supporters" and not the end all for all my authentic needs. As Chris Daley has said, he has sent people to other vendors not on this forum's list simply because they have a product that the customer needed and one he did not or could not offer. Chris is not the only approved vendor that has done this. Any good business person would do the same because if you treat the customer right, provide them good quality service and truth about your products, they will come back for future purchases. Given the choice between a vendor on the forum list and one not, when all else about their products are the same, I choose to go with the vendor who supports this forum. If not, I go with the best quality, the best service and yes the best price.

So please look at the vendor list for what it is, a list of quality vendors who choose to support this forum! However, I do suggest to those who are "in the know" about authenticity, to show a little more patience when newbies ask questions about items. Authentic verses non-authentic should not be viewed as us verse them. People ask questions because they want to learm, grow, and improve themselves! Besides, why can't we all just get along.