John's got a point, to a point. Perhaps what is needed is an objective
set of standards like a concours checklist (only not likely as detailed)
that the majority of folks here can refer to. If it were posted at a
website, and then the individual item (truck, etc.) given a score that
breaks down the different sections (i.e. On a scale of 1 to 10, read it
as Body-Engine-Drivetrain-Completeness-etc.) so that each listing can be
described with a set of simple numbers like Truck, 8-2-8-3 for a truck
that was in fairly decent shape but was missing the head off the motor.
Or something along this line... If this site were in one location and
the person who agrees to "judge" the lots posted these reports, then
there could also be a spot for feedback from other bidders who saw the
vehicles to comment on the accuracy (or lack thereof). This might keep
the judge more inclined to be objective in their inspections. It would
also be a good way to keep records of what was listed, inspected, and
sold outside of relying on "official" records. Maybe even David from GL
might be interested in setting up something like this as a
web-accessible database? Might make it easier for both GL and the
bidders to keep track of things that way. If he's interested, I'd like
to discuss the matter with him. If the company's serious about trying
to smooth things out, perhaps I could help as a consultant, coming from
the outside?
Jay Travis
MBA, MS-Information Systems
J. Forster wrote:
> DDoyle9570@aol.com wrote:
>
>I think the suggestion that hobbyists inspect and catalog the property is an
>outstanding one...I volunteer to take care of nearby Ft. Campbell.
>
>
>IMO, this is full of problems and totally unworkable. What is to prevent someone
>from describing a vehicle as total junk, and quietly tellng a buddy it's NIB si
>it goes at a fire sale price? Absolutely nothing. If this is done on a personal
>basis (Hey Fred, please checkout this item for me since it's near you), that's OK
>and a good way to screen things, but having hobbyists do official screening and
>cataloging is improper as far as I am concerned.
>
>Furthermore, there are problems with the standards the screeners might employ.
>One guy might well classify a vehicle with a bad radiator hose as junk, whereas
>another screener might only consider a vehicle as junk if it had taken a direct
>hit from a Hellfire.
>
>Just my $.02. Flame away. I have a delete key.
>
>-John
>
>
>
>
>===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
>To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
>To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 11:49:34 PST