“don’t post anything you wouldn’t want your mother to see.”

Navy Chief, Navy Pride

I say you’re not a great blogger if you haven’t been threatened with lawsuits–haha.

We homeschool our soon to be 5 children as well so I relish my independence–especially here in VA versus other states which are much lower on the liberty scale.

Back to showing property and doing listing appointments in flip flops….

I think you’re the guy from NOVA, that I read from time to time? Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my point. I think you can and should give an opinion, but if you’re going to give an opinion, such as “Offering a bonus to the Selling Agent, only if they bring a Full Price Offer is bad” than you should be able to substantiate that with case law, legislation or the Realtor Code of Ethics. If you can’t put your finger on it, than that’s ok; just make sure that people clearly know your opinion from fact.

My point is that the reader should be able to clearly define opinion from fact. To further illustrate my point – the RE Blogger who wrote that a Builder was going into BK and had before. It’s the “had before” that got him in trouble, because he didn’t show it as a fact. If I’m making a statement of fact, than I should have to support it.

I’m a homeschooling father and it’s only partially based on my strong faith convictions. However, I do not go on my blog and post that the Public School system is heathenish, because I have no facts to back it up.

Perhaps I should have worded that policy better to say just what I just said in my comment

Does that make more sense?

Steve,

I’m with you. I hate over regulation, but really these policy recommendations are backed by some wrong doing somewhere. It kills me that a group of people (RE.net) who routinely call for the “raising of the bar” always seem to bulk at a rule or policy that actually affects them. All of us do it, however. This post was intended to protect the Broker.

Yes, you can deliver IDX on your blog, but IDX dictates how that information is delivered and the Listing Broker agreed to have that information released via IDX and within the constraints of IDX. A key element to most IDX is that the listing companies name must be attached to their listings.

#6 relates to agents who are going out taking photos and videos and re-marketing the listing as if it were their own. I love what FranklyMLS.com has done, where they do give props to the listing company, but agents can go augment the IDX by adding photos, links to videos and comments. However, that’s an augmentation to IDX. We have agents locally who do a whole new marketing profile on the home, including interior shots and the Seller NEVER gave permission for this buyer agent to do so.

If I want to take IDX and say, here’s the 10 lowest price homes, that would OK as long as you’re linking back to the IDX which the Seller and Lister mutually agreed on.

#6 Doesn’t the IDX agreement allow you to show other broker’s listings on your web site? I would think that should cover asking them for permission wouldn’t it?

Seems like way too much regulation. I hate regulation—if you can’t tell. I just want to sell homes, do a good job and give excellent customer service.

However #1 blows me away and is an insult to any excellent blogger. How can you have an intense, gripping blog without strong opinions versus “Agents may write only factual statements….” I don’t get it. What’s the point then? Are agents not supposed to share opinions on market trends or industry trends publicly? I can see that coming as more $$$$ gets stolen from my 5 children in the name of “stimulus” and health care by the erosion of general liberties.

However in the RE industry the most popular and influential blogs are likely to be those that also offer strong opinions and insights into the marketplace. Do you disagree?

Are agents supposed to check their personalities at the door and their instincts from being on the front lines of real estate and hide that wealth of information from the public because they cannot document it as a fact. The whole concept of #1 is Orwellian when cogitated upon.

I’d hardly have any blog posts that could clear #1 alone.

And let me exit by reiterating this is a great post and has great and practical advice no doubt. But #1 is just bogus.

Maybe you could clarify???? or expand on it Rathburn?

It’s appreciated, you shinning a flash light on new media rules of the road.

Thanks.