I haven't read all the previous posts, so I might be covering old territory... what would your rating system be?

I have considered starting a thread asking Homeownerswhat the three most significant things that a real estate agent, or a Realtor(r) has done to benefit their purchase--and a similar one for Sellers. Then I could use this information to offer the most superior service and be the most useful agent and Realtor(r).

Also, I have thought of doing one for the 3 least beneficial or detrimental things were. That way I could avoid useless practices, and watch out for signs of bad practice when working with other agents.

Thank you all for your comments.. appreciate it. Now i will proceed to delete this thread.

re: "I agree w/ your comments that if his site were to become a snake pit without redeeming value that it will fail. You said his motivations are irrelevant, and I disagree. The value and integrity of any business is substantially shaped by the mission and purpose of the business. The decisions made about the site and the business are determined by the motivations of the decision makers. "

Well - again, if his intentions are bad, it will fail - so what's the difference?

re: Myke/Jym - no, for the 10th time now. My name is Myke. period.

re: Smear campaign - LOL. using different names, posting positive reviews to smear people (?!?!?) - who's the conspiracy theory nuts again?

re: professionalism/ethics in impersonating someone
Let me ask you a question. If impersonating a client on a website to leave a favorable review is okay - then what if when someone asks for references, you give them the name of a partner from your office - and they can impersonate the client, and give a positive review? What if a local publication was doing a story about you, and wanted to talk to past clients - and you impersonated that client to give yourself a positive review?
Would that be okay? Cause it's essentially the same thing. Nevermind the fact that you accuse US of impersonating the person to smear him, and say that's wrong - it's okay if he does it though?

Come on now, really.

It's no secret I look at the real estate industry with some skepticism. But this idea that I would go out of my way to "smear" someone I don't even know - is laughable.

Jym, Jam, or Wham whatever your name is, talk about a troll, this fool just registered yesterday.. hahahahaha

Jym,
What do you mean that people who know Alan are not happy w/ agents that post here? My question is not about Alan specifically, but rather a general question about what makes these people unhappy. Is it about the consumers, trolls, Trulia specifically, any third party site? The reasons could take any shape....curious about what you meant in your post.
Deborah

I appreciate the rush to my defense, but you're wasting your "electronic breath". You're not going to convince t-man, snor or myke that I didn't post those dastardly reviews, and you're going to find yourselves the next target of attack.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Find myself the NEXT target of attack? LOL! BTDT!

Let this be a lesson to you. This site puts you at a disadvantage. People can register anonymously and slam Realtors, meanwhile the Realtor has all of their contact info. I feel no pity for you elvis whoring yourself out for free here.
~~~~~~~~~~
Jym, (what a coincidence, Myke, Jym...hmmmm), it didn't even occur to me that one of you posted Elvis' testimonials there yourselves. Or maybe even Tman... Hmmmmmm...

Deborah, and JR

I appreciate the rush to my defense, but you're wasting your "electronic breath". You're not going to convince t-man, snor or myke that I didn't post those dastardly reviews, and you're going to find yourselves the next target of attack.

I'm sure by Monday, we'll have a new "tempest du jour" who doesn't have "childlike printiing" (thanks so much for that tman), because that's the way it works here on "As the Stomach Turns".

Clarification....
In my earlier post just a minute ago, I wrote....
Predicated upon my high opinion, yes, I suspect that any postings were done in fair and ethical manner.

Here's the clarification........
Predicated upon my high opinion, I suspect that if these posts were added as a result of Elvis' involvement, it was done in a fair and ethical manner.

To those who condemned Elvis, do you owe him an apology if, indeed, this was part of a smear campaign? Can you acknowledge that such might be a possibility?

If I take quotes from client reference letters (which I have permission to release) and place on my Trulia profile, how do I know when someone might copy/paste this or where they might take it? Maybe I should put up a few testimonials on my Trulia profile and see what happens. Because I spoke highly of Elvis, will that make me guilty by association....or a target by association?

Disclaimer: My suspicions of the ethics and behaviors of a few are not indicative of my opinions of the public at large.

Deborah

hmmm... the fact that someone has posted a testimonial on an unknown Realtor rating site, that was copied and pasted from my legitimate testimonials on my Trulia profile...

that is a quandry.

I believe we have proven, fairly recently, that there are mimic trolls on this site... I'm just surprised they didn't post BAD reviews, and assign them to me. Although I'm sure that's yet to come. Stay tuned.

Oh, and thanx Deborah... I appreciate the support.

Myke,

I don't know the details of Elvis' post, nor will I make accusations without such. I didn't read JR's posts as anything but an exploration of other possibilities. None of us know if Elvis reprinted with a prior blanket permission, specific permission for this posting, no permission, or perhaps the clients posted on their own. None of us know if Elvis has spoken often of Trulia and has current/past clients who read Trulia on their own. None of us know that someone else did not create a copy/paste as an intended smear campaign. Any of these may be possible, as well as other potential realities I overlooked.

While I noted “no permission”, I don’t suspect that to be the case. Having read an enormous number of Elvis’ postings, he consistently demonstrates knowledge, fairness, objectivity and dedication to professionalism.

Before anyone jumps on the incorrect train car of wrong assumptions that I am defending Elvis because he is a Realtor, remember that I am the one who believes that more than half of Realtors should not be. My opinion of Elvis stands on the positions he represents in public postings on real estate matters. Predicated upon my high opinion, yes, I suspect that any postings were done in fair and ethical manner.

I am disappointed to see yours and other comments that predetermine that a Realtor said it, so it’s bad or wrong. I don’t have a war against consumers; I like most of the customers I have, and all of my clients….with rare exception. I don’t judge all consumers by the predisposition of a few, or the irrationalities of a few.

As it pertains to Snor’s pursuit of a rating site, I am glad to hear that Snor is working with input of Realtors, attorneys, and others in the industry. I agree w/ your comments that if his site were to become a snake pit without redeeming value that it will fail. You said his motivations are irrelevant, and I disagree. The value and integrity of any business is substantially shaped by the mission and purpose of the business. The decisions made about the site and the business are determined by the motivations of the decision makers.
You went on to say, who cares? I do. Snor came here with his post to find out what people thought of a rating system. I think a rating system and public feedback are terrific, if executed in a manner that serves the public interest.

Deborah

@ok, kids, cool down, because it doent matter what anyone say in this forum, the site is being built you can cry blood.

why not?
i can read webMD.

lol

Now Myke, I know you aren't equating our profession with a DOCTOR's, are you? :)

It has nothing to do with the profession - it has to do with - that's just sketchy.
Doesn't matter if you're a doctor, lawyer, programmer, real estate agent - whatever.

They give you positive feedback, and tell you that you can use that feedback for marketing purposes - fine, put it on your website, put it in print, but you don't ever impersonate that person like that.

Here at my job - we have testimonials from clients that we use in marketing material all the time. If one of those testimonials showed up in that context - i would surely expect to get an irate phonecall from that person.

You guys are trying to rationalize sketchy behavior. Period.
First it was "oh - there's nothing wrong with that...."
Now it's "well how do you know he didn't ask?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First you asked one question, then you asked another. You're going to keep asking questions till you get an answer you like. When I get a testimonial it is given with the knowledge that it will be used. Since they were posted on two different days, I infer that he at least asked permission. You prefer to assume it is a deceptive devious action--not surprising since we know how you feel about our profession.

Deb - and both of you are thinking along the lines of the "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" monkies...

You really expect anyone to believe that you're going to call up someone who left you feedback from who knows how long ago - at the very earliest January of this year - and ask them to go to a website and give you feedback, some 4 months after the fact? And even assuming you do go out on that limb, the person writes almost word for word the exact same review, same punctuation and all?
Sorry - don't buy it. Not for a second.

You guys are trying to rationalize sketchy behavior. Period.
First it was "oh - there's nothing wrong with that...."
Now it's "well how do you know he didn't ask?"

Anybody with two brain cells they can squeeze together to form a thought can see how obvious it is, and anybody with any sense of morals/ethics whatsoever can see how sketchy it is.

Rationalize all you want, it just makes you look worse and worse.

Asking someone if they would do it - fine, no problem.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that. "Hey - if you don't mind, go to this website, and leave some feedback of our transactions."
Great way to go about it.

Somehow - given the circumstances - I HIGHLY doubt that is the case.

JR and I seemed to have posted concurrently thnking similar thoughts.

You don't see a problem with impersonating a client to leave yourself positive feedback on a website?

And you wonder why us mere mortals look at a lot of agents with suspicion?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe he asked them to.

Question for Myke

Would you consider appropriate or inappropriate for a Realtor to ask their client to visit a rating site and provide input?

Curious.
Deborah

You don't see a problem with impersonating a client to leave yourself positive feedback on a website?

And you wonder why us mere mortals look at a lot of agents with suspicion?

I don't know, Myke, I'll just let Elvis fight his own battle. I don't see the difference.

If i went to a website, and posted as if I were a client to make that testimonial seem as if it came directly from a client, when in reality - i'm just copy/pasting from another site - i sure as heck hope one of my collegues would slap me up side the head in the process.

oh - sorry, it's not QUITE the exact same thing - there's one or two words that are different. Punctuation is in the same place, just on the one on trulia - it says

"We didn't list at the highest price of the range that he suggested, but we went under contract, with multiple offers, selling within $5,000 of Alan's suggested listing price! "

and on realestateratingz - it says:

"We didn't list at the highest price of the range that he suggested, but we went under contract, with multiple offers, selling close to Alan's suggested listing price!"

sorry- HUGE difference there. Clearly i am mistaken, right?

OK. I don't see what difference it would make, though if those folks gave him permission to use their words as a testimonial, but I know that we realtors are held to some kind of standard by certain members of the public well beyond our fiduciary and ethical responsibilities. Personally I wouldn't have a problem if you posted your testimonials about your web development expertise provided you had permission.

I don't dispute testimonials - i dispute the idea that someone sent him that testimonial back in January as it says on trulia - and just this morning, went to that rating site and put in word for word EXACTLY the same testimonial.

You dispute his testimonials, is that it? But a website that would allow the public to critique their Realtor anonymously would be believable and trustworthy?

JR - I can

http://www.trulia.com/voices/profile/Real_Estate_Pro-Chicago…

If you don't see how it's obvious - then I don't even know what to say.

And another protection system to that people like the previous poster can't use it to further their agenda.

By the way, Tman, can you prove that Elvis did that?

@ Mike,

Well its not just getting the site, there is huge PR cost. Actually this is a huge part of my planned budget right now. My focus right now is just getting the site done, i have staff of 5 data collectors, looking at public records, sites like trulia and zilliow and other real estate site, to get info on realtors.

I have developed, what i think is a cool way to get ratings (which not solely based on people, but a few other things because i am filing a IP, i wont get into it.)

Again, my reason for posting the question here was more to get feedback. Just so other realtors know, this site is being developed by consulting with brokers, realtors and attorneys.

I will update all, when we go into private beta.

Yea - monetizing is the easy part really. There's content syndication, aggregation services, "premium" content - could even open it up to allow agents to have a blog on the site - so you can go,read the agents blog, and see what people actually say about that person.
Wrap it all up into one, and charge 'em (realtor) for it. Position it right, could be a huge resource for both agents and customers.

Really - that's not horribly important right off the bat. Running a site isn't terribly expensive these days (i've got like 4 of 'em!)- especailly if you're using an open source platform. You get into MS technologies (.net/sql server) it can get a little more expensive for hosting, but a LAMP system is pennies a day at this point.

Sounds like a good idea. It's been awhile since I checked them out, but the teacher/professor rating systems have been valuable. And, even beyond a straight "rating," the comments can be particularly useful. Even if two Realtors receive the same score, there may be substantial differences in the ways the operate, how they relate to their clients, and so forth. The site suggested by Tman provides that, and it was interesting to compare and contrast the different comments on the same agent. Remember, too, that the agent who's right for one client may be totally wrong for another. (Some of the books out there on personality types--Myers-Briggs, etc.--develop the concept that in a relationship, whether business or social, it's not enough to know just one person's type. It's important to know both, to understand how they can best work together.)

There are plenty of ways of monetizing the site. Everything from ads on the site to licensing of the information. The trick will be to get enough ratings and enough traffic to do so. But that's the challenge for any site.

In addition to the raw ratings, include other useful information. Free reports on how to choose a Realtor. Interactive quizes or surveys. All the regular purchasing "tools" like mortgage calculators. Make it fun. And make it so that it's not just a one-shot experience. ("Gee, I need to sell a house. Guess I'll check out Snor's site to see who's rated highest.") Get them visiting before they need a Realtor. And keep them visiting after they've used one.

Hope that helps. Give it a try.

Well Deborah - His personal motivations are pretty much irrelevent. If it turns into a snake pit, and has no redeeming value - then our open market system we have here will sort it out, and he will fail.

Time will tell. Beyond that - who cares?

I don't know how you are going to make money. How are you going to monetize it?

Mike,

I am actually agreeing with you on many of your general outlooks. My posts are not anti-feedback sites. I do happen to be extremely skeptical of Snor‘s undertaking.

I don't think member generated content is immoral.....I think it's awesome. Trulia attempts to let Voices self moderate to a great extent, and I agree w/ that. If I didn’t believe in user generated content, I wouldn’t participate on Trulia. You are absolutely right. I wholeheartedly believe in social media, consumer generated content, and am a user of rating guides and consumer opinion poles. My visit to Newseum in Washington DC (reference in earlier post on this thread) was prompted by these beliefs and interests.

If I have not been clear in my posts, my apologies to you and other readers.

A rating site is simply a business model, one which will live up (or down) to it’s own mission. Some business have solid plans and are run well; others are not.

My statements pertaining to the grey edge of what one can get away with were not directed toward you, or any specific person. It spoke to the fact that one business owner or site owner might seek to push the envelope into a grey zone and another might seek to take actions to promote responsible and civil conduct. Example: Voices has community guidelines, best practices, profanity guards, and will on rare occasion step in directly to moderate. Another site owner might not implore the same self-imposed policies.

The value of a rating site, or feedback site, depends upon the methodologies, sources and information utilized, the purpose, motives, qualifications, knowledge and capabilities of the people behind it, and the resources available to make it happen.

It’s not about me being opposed to a rating site….it’s about one that is done right, provides consumer benefit, and raises the bar for the industry.

Deborah

Deborah - it's not a matter of "what can i get away with" or any sort of grey area.

Take a site like citysearch again for example - or yahoo local is an even better example.
How many MILLIONS of people use that site? You expect a handful of yahoo employees to police every single post any member makes? Obviously not. (which is exactly why site owners are not held responsible for member content!)

The idea that somehow any member generated content is immoral or unethical or legally questionable is laughable at best.
It also begs the question - if you really feel that way - why are you generating content on Trulia?

Deborah

>>>>>I am an avid supporter of freedom of speech and user generated content.>>>>>


I see ... as long as it doesn't affect you or yours.


-

Mike,

I am fully in support of rating and feedback sites. I believe the owners and promoters of such have an obligation to honesty and integrity.....notwithstanding what the law might allow one to "get away with."

I don't conduct my business on the fringes of the grey edge of what I can "get away with it" and I look for higher standards in all business, real estate being only one subset of business.

I don't think Zagats is the only resource, and it is good for there to be multiple sources and platforms. (Although, yes, I am a Zagat’s fan for many years.)

I don’t question the value of rating sites; but I do question Snor‘s motives, his knowledge of the industry. It appears that he has an agenda that is not the 'public interest" but, rather to serve his own goals. I was particularly bothered by his dialog with Jed and found it quite revealing. I wouldn't respect Zagats (or citysearch or...etc.) for using their site to grind their axe with a dining facility based on anything other than relevant facts. The fact is that these sites gained public acceptance because they were designed with the motive of public service. I don’t see or hear that in Snor’s contributions.

There are many posts on Trulia that I take with a grain of salt. Other regular contributors are great sources for the public, and I appreciate what I have learned from some great posters on Trulia.

I am an avid supporter of freedom of speech and user generated content.

Deborah

Deborah - i can certainly understand that - but not everyone is as... shall we say "organized" about it as you are.

One example: You use zagats for resteraunts. Great. Does that mean citysearch is useless? That's almost entirely member generated reviews. What about yahoo local? Again, almost all member generated content. TripAdvisor? All member generated, and spot on.

A lot of times people aren't looking for a definitive answer online. They're looking to get as much information as possible. Most people realize to take other people's word with a grain of salt online. Agents on here always recommend to get a list of references and check up on thier agent before entering into an agreement. Really? a list of references? from the agent? Do you expect there will be anything other then glowing reviews in that list of references? When I interview people, I don't even bother looking at thier references most of the time for the same reason. Having a place where the average individual can give unfiltered feedback, and have it accessible is great for getting an idea of how that person/company/service operates.
Could there end up being some reviews that are flat out false? Sure. it still gives you background into the person though. I can't think of too many situations where someone would get great service, be really happy - but turn around and give a horrible review - or get horrible service and give a great review. Some of the details might get stretched here or there, but it still gives you a rough outline. That's what most people are looking for.

I believe good realtors would be very glad to see this website since many of their clients would certainly recommend them. On the other hand, bad realtors would be very scared about your website for obvious reason.

When you have such website, I would like to name dozens of great Community Realtors@ each of them specialized on a condo or townhouse community that as soon as you refer buyers to them, they got the whole community sold out, helping both buyers and move up sellers to buy bigger home.

And, I would probably also cite some, very few, realtors who trying to attack me openly to show they are better, but all my info are first hand and real time.

Again, Trulia is the best real estate website that put buyers, sellers, realtors, mortgage banks and real estate experts like myself together, and I believe they will have similar function in the near future ...

Snor, I think you are a troll. I don't believe you sold your house and are using the proceeds to fund this noble mission. I think you a troll trying to get realtors' angry and justify your own feelings.

Snor,

I disagree that Realtors are concerned about what your proposed site will do them. Please allow me to place in the context of myself using a website rating system for a business service I may seek as a consumer.

As a consumer, whether I was searching for a doctor, dentist, plumber, tailor, or restaurant, I am looking for someone who can fill my need / A source which can help me locate qualified, competent and dedicated help is a source which may be of keen interest to me. I have, unfortunately, had cause to seek highly skilled medical help for several relatives in multiple states. (I am an only child w/ 8 parents…..figure that one out!) I have utilized several sources for tracking down medical specialists in multiple states, including home health caregivers, equipment suppliers, etc., in addition to physicians and facilities.

In my searches, I am looking for a reliable objective source where the mission of the information platform is to help me find the best help. I am not interested in reading through pages of rants and venting. As a consumer, I very much want to know the criteria for establishing a rating. If the criteria used matches the same as my values, it becomes worthwhile. If the information platform measures criteria which is unimportant to me, the significance of the rating drops. As a consumer, I want to know.

Example: Zagats provides information about consumer ratings for food, décor, service, and price. Zagats makes the criteria available to the consumer.

As a consumer, I want sources that help me find high quality service providers, and welcome sources that can make information gathering efficient and accurate, and I must also consider it credible. In any market research, there are sampling errors, and guidelines for creating the sample. Some research studies are deemed valuable, and others not.

When I need a home health provider, a doctor, or a restaurant, I want to accomplish my objective of finding the good source. It seems from your posts, that you seem more focused on what you can do provide a platform for those who wish to condemn. I was particularly concerned with the dialog which has now been deleted between you and Jed. You called Jed an ass_hole, and you mentioned that you were going to put up his rating right away on your site. That expression does not speak to the commitment of helping the public find the best agents, but rather your personal platform for abusing those who disagree with you.

I don’t expect you to have read the multiple posts that I have written. If you ever found my posts pertaining to “raising the bar on licensing” you would find that my views on obtaining and maintaining a license are light years beyond any current regulations. I have expressed that I think it is wrong that a new licensee can pass a test and take on the responsibility of selling another person’s largest asset without any type of apprentice program. I compare my proposals on this subject to the training that appraisers complete before license issuance.

There are several Realtors who are quite passionate about raising the bar. I have not seen anything in your writing that values Realtor input at all. If it is there, it doesn’t come across. Perhaps it is there, and you just have not shared that.

I believe that sources which are helpful for the public are terrific, and seek those myself, as a consumer.

Deborah

@Mike,

No dont work for software firm, its interesting, i sold my house and using the proceeds to bank roll this project for now. However have a very interested investor, an torn between just doing it myself for now or taking seed money. I just thought i would throw it out there since sellers and buyers frequent this site.

The realtors seems to be so concern about what a system like this will do "to them", but i really believe, enough to sell my house to do this project, that its necessary. Even more so now with everything going on in the industry.

I wont disclose how the rating system will work, but it will consider a range of what i call "activities".

Yea I mean - not sure if it would even work - considering there's no sure-fire way to guarentee a proper match between an agent on Trulia, or an agent on a ratings site.
Would be interesting to see though, given the number of agents out there who throw advice out all the time - what thier clients really think of them.

Definately a good idea though.

Do you work for a software firm out there - or are you just doing this on your own on the side?

@Mike,

That is a great idea, however am not sure it work, since Trulia and Zillow has different goal and objectives. The sole purpose of the site is to give buyers a platform to "evaluate" realtors based on there dealings with other clients. I know that realtors run rampant in NY, burning clients without anything stoping them. Well in 2 months we go into private beta..

Snor - what would be really interesting - is if you can work something out to feed ratings back to sites like Trulia and Zillow.,,,,

@ Debt Free,

Whether or not its exciting, the site is in development right now. I am currently talking to a group of investors and they seem to think the idea has some legs.

It doesn't sound very exciting. Have you done any focus groups to see if this would be of interest to the public.

Actually Deborah - site owners are pretty well protected from content that's posted by individual members.
There's a pretty standard set of terms and conditions that goes with any member driven site - that completely releases the site owners from responsiblity. In fact, rating sites, blogs, and just about any site where people say something about other people - have been sued - and in almost every single case I can think of - the lawsuit has been tossed for this very reason.

Where it gets tricky, is if the site owner/operator originates content that can be argued as libel or slander. That's where your blog reference comes in, as blogs are generated solely by the author. If the author of the site makes a statement that is slanderous, they can be sued. However - if a random person off the net makes a comment in the comments section of the same blog - the author of the blog is not responsible.

Really it all boils down to origin. Site operators cannot be held responsible for member driven content for the simple fact that the content did not originate with them, and it is unreasonable to expect the operator to verify every single piece of information anyone posts. Member content is presented "as is without warrantee" so to speak.

So - in terms of risk and liability in running a site like this - it's really not anywhere near as dangerous as you seem to think. As long as the owner/operator keeps thier own mouth in check - they won't have any problems.
Typically - a common courtesy is to have a procedure in which people who feel they've been wronged can make thier case to get offensive member content removed. Typicall