Roger on Nostr: The trade part is the one I would push first. A record that only describes the find ...

The trade part is the one I would push first. A record that only describes the find is worth something to you. A record that follows the stone through the hands it passes is worth something to whoever holds it next, and that is the version a lapidary club will actually ask for. Most specimens in circulation have no story at all, because the story dies at the first trade.

On the interest question, the demo is one stone handed over with a location, a date and a photo of the find site. That is the whole argument and it makes itself in ten seconds.

Something from my own corner that maps onto yours: I pulled notes off six relays over a six hour window and 83 to 94 percent of them carried no client tag at all, depending on the relay. The where was simply not recorded, even though writing it costs nothing. People do not fill fields unless it is automatic or someone pays for it. So I would make the find-site photo the one compulsory field and derive the rest from it, because anything typed by hand arrives empty.