Austin,
The effort did not fly because there was insufficient participation. There simply was not enough interest among appraisers in joining. This was not a shocking outcome and was discussed in some detail at the time. But the only way to find out for sure was to give it a chance. I sure never had any concerns that our small amounts of initiation monies were somehow being misappropriated, and until recently, for Steve to call it quits and return the funds may not have been appropriate -- as we can discuss via email later if you like.
In short, at least in part, it can be put like this:
If a given appraiser has not been unjustly beat-up by an inept and/or corrupt board, they had little personal or financial incentive to join. In fact, there existed several inherent deterrents. Here is one that was never discussed. I did not bring it up because, while true, it would have appeared manipulative and self-serving:
An appraiser who has never had any such problems with their board benefits personally and professionally by the perception or misperception existing in the appraisal community that such lack of "appraisal board experience" is solely and simply a function of their exemplary appraisal practice. To "discredit" the (obviously wise and good) judge, which is the given state appraisal board, is somewhat "counterproductive." Whether the given appraiser is the best and most ethical or the worst of numbers hitters, it makes no difference, the above holds true. The appraisers who bravely joined anyway, and thereby probably drew some attention to themselves on the part of their respective boards are to be highly commended. You and Lee Ann and others fall into that category.
It is similar to the same reason so many appraisers have not signed the Appraisers Petition. They want to keep their heads down. Ironically, I suspect some are now embarrassed that their names do not appear on it, but do not care to sign now as it would draw attention to the fact that they have not yet signed it. I have only heard one good reason -- that was applicable to only one specific appraiser for not signing, and his reasoning sure did make sense. The other reasons I have heard, are similar to this:
"Yes, I am a residential appraiser, but have never
experienced any pressure, and I just don't understand
what all the fuss is about."
They are either liars or fools, or a combination of the two. Period. That might well be one's "knee jerk reaction" after doing a survey of the "hold outs." And actually, even if it was true -- however unlikely -- that an appraiser had never experienced any pressure personally or know an appraiser who had, for them to maintain the position that it therefore does not exist, when it is so obvious to the "typically alert" appraiser that the practice is pervasive, does make you wonder. But the assessment is a bit harsh and simplified. However, there is little question that it demonstrates a good bit of insecurity, and a cowardly inaction on their part. And also it is true that what is often characterized as "apathy" is often in reality high parts insecurity and cowardly...
Many of the people who refused to sign are the types who just do not take "unnecessary risks" with their careers. (Yes, unfortunately that does sometimes imply "course of least resistance appraising" where the appeasing of a client or borrower may trump ethics if that option appears easier or safer). On the other hand, this is not to say, of course, that there are not some blazing numbers hitters who have likely signed the petition..[SMILE]
While I am on the subject, you might be surprised at how many so call "chickenhawks" have not signed the petition. It really is amazing. Just to test the theory, a few weeks ago I made a list of maybe 40 posters I have traded posts with in threads over the months in various forums on AppraisersForum, and then I downloaded the petition into an Excel spreadsheet (absolutely could not be a simpler procedure, BTW). I was batting over 90% with most names. Translation: "Hmmm... well, if I had to guess, I would say this particular individual has a real high probability of being a Non-Signer" -- Type in the name (BTW, for some reason you cannot just cut and paste) into Excel's search function, and PRESTO! -- Damn, I am good!!! There were a few surprises, but not many. Also, I found a meaningful correlation between WHEN someone decided to sign versus predictions -- while it was not as much of a "sure thing" undertaking. For instance, was an individual among the first 1,000 signers, or did they decide it was appropriate to sign only after 3,000 had already signed, see what I mean?
Overall, it was a gratifying and fascinating exercise for the short amount of time it took to do. One encouraging finding was that the majority of "original pioneer AppraisersForum members," you will be happy to hear, were indeed signers even in the case of those who continue the tradition of using "screen names." It took little imagination to figure out how to match them to their "signatures" on the petition, but it was not hard to do.
Back to FAIR, The three founders were Steve, Tom Hildebrandt and George Hatch, if I am not mistaken. They are particularly to be commended for reasons this post has gotten way too long to get into. Also, the effort was quite successful in several very important, but maybe unobvious, ways, and there is "the rest of the story" that I am not at total liberty to get into here, however I will fill you in via email if you like. Let me know. I believe you will agree that it is "redeeming."
dcj
