Be careful of the Internet Speech Police. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade without stubbing your toe on one. I love the reminder that we should be telling the truth on our blog posts. We should. What I'm curious about is how far is NAR willing to go when people say something that is true but some other competitor doesn't like. We already have libel, slander and defamation laws. Be careful when you want to impose too much of your association free speech rules on individual people. They may stake out Constitutional challenges because they view it as anti-competitive...
If it sucks it sucks. I should be able to say that and not get kicked out of a dues paying organization because I happen to be a blunt person. If I am not in the mood to make my speech flowery then I wont. You can't make me. No one can. I'm just saying there is more to life and reality than the everything is coming up roses or be quiet crowd. Blunt people should not be penalized because a serial liar can make it sound like something you want to hear. I'm sorry some of you don't believe that tact and diplomacy can breed lies. Some people use it as a shield to justify why they didn't/don't tell the truth. At least you know where you stand with me, good or bad. I have a big mouth. :-)
People are entitled to a good and bad review point of view. Opinions are subjective and the moment you start trying to make it a violation to express yourself you open up a can of worms you can't close. Bloggers don't just write about "the facts," they also write about their impressions, feelings, likes, dislikes and can be just as relevant or irreverent as the mainstream Press. I dare you to pick up a single newspaper and not find something subjective in it. If two people are in a room there will always be two opinions. Why not just say don't violate the libel, slander and defamation laws or there will be consequences. Period. Bet you can kill several paragraphs with that sum and summary statement. What ever you do, I'm behind you because I like being a Realtor and I like NAR. I will, however, say exactly what I mean. That's what bloggers do.
As a NAR member I have to say shit or get off the pot. Don't committee this to death, FIX IT! We brokers rely upon search engines so the consumer has choices and can find us. They usually don't ask for me by name, they tend to put in key words looking for what they want and the search engines make it possible for them to find us and our listings.
A seller expects other consumers to find their home, that's why they hire us. Since only brokers have access to the MLS, don't you think it is counter productive to hinder our ability to market homes to the actual people who buy them by maximizing our search engine optimization?
Most MLS members expect other members to market all available properties to all of our clients. That's why we join and covet the access and bust our bloggers butts to get licensed. IDX is the name of the game and most MLS services have a individualized policy that all members can market the inventory. Yup, we are tasked with protecting that information, however, it appears to be the height of stupidity to make it illegal for the search engines to index what we go out of our way to promote and advertise to the whole world. The Internet is Global. If a MLS or NAR makes it difficult for members to advertise their listings and to be found via the search engines, those policies make it impossible for us to compete against the big dogs like Realtor.com on a level playing field. I want multiple licenses, so I have multiple MLS rules I have to follow which may eventually result in several IDX databases flowing through one site. Do you see where I am going with this? This issue has to be addressed as quickly as possible because multiple state licensees may be in a hell of a bind if you don't get hip with the current technology available. I may want to be the next version of Realtor.com but I can't if you restrict my ability to have my IDX site indexed by search engines or if one state's MLS rules conflict with another, screwing my website up.
We pay way too many fees to allow that to continue to happen as we try and grow our business models... Realtor.com is optional not mandatory. I have never gotten a single lead from the site because if you don't pay them they do not put your contact information on your own listings that the MLS automatically sends over to the site. Hmm... I have to wonder if knocking Google or a Broker with a really cool IDX site smells of anti-competition in favor of the big dog or competitors at the expense of the wee folk getting creative with the freebee marketing. That is a subjective thought of no basis other than theoretical speculation. Don't sue me for thinking out loud (LOL).
BTW, I am not the only one wondering this. Once we find out something is going on (or not happening) we start talking amongst ourselves, asking questions and the blog posts begin. So here I am putting my two cents into the pot because I don't want to speculate, am asking losts of questions because I want to know why this happened and why it wasn't fixed sooner.
I am amazed NAR sent this to committee when one line adjusted could have benefited the entire real estate community. Updates should be debated, yes, I agree, but how much debate is up to NAR because NAR controls the rules. I thought from what I read at Inman it would have been a no brainer. Ooops. I was wrong.
NAR, in my humble opinion, you need to update your IDX digital rights management so we can compete effectively with the current technology at hand and not go broke doing inefficient coding modifications to our websites that serves no purpose other than to destroy our search engine optimization when the competition whines. I do not see Realtor.com having to do this but please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. The search engine is free to index that mega site. BTW, I'm a buyers broker. Are you telling me I can never promote a listing agent's property to my buyers on my site if a competitor whines after putting it in the MLS? If I can print the info on a flier and hand it out or mail it why can't my search engine get people back to my site?
Search engine indexing is not scraping and my MLS gives us all access to every property and the right to use limited information to market the inventory to clients and prospects. I guess every MLS is different so I guess my question is what are you going to do to give all members a level playing field regarding IDX sites, especially if I cross state lines with multiple licenses?
Tell me what I missed here... I am sooooo gonna be watching for an answer to this.
Disclaimer: Any comments and contributions provided on ActiveRain.com (or other electronic or print media) does not establish an agency relationship with any third party. Blog posts are intended to be informational only. Please be advised that real estate practices vary in regions and from state to state and market to market. The information contained herein does not constitute legal advice. All parties in need of legal, accounting, tax, or real estate guidance are directed to consult with the licensed professional of their choice. Please seek specific guidance from a retained professional in the specific field(s) required to service your interests. I and/or team blog writers make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this web site and its associated sites inclusive of but not limited to CarolynTannStarr.com MySpace/TannStarr 46486 NY Working Moms Examiner ActiveRain Group Club Chaos ClubChaosAgents.com CyberMinions.net CTannStarr Outside Blog CTannStarr Localism Blog TannStarr.net UberMental.com
© Carolyn Tann-Starr, 2008-2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from the re-blog authors (when appropriate)and Carolyn Tann-Starr is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Carolyn Tann-Starr, (the re-blog authors when appropriate) and Wordy C's Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.