DISCUSS the Hermes AT Thread

[oregonfanlisa]

Maybe in that proposed permanent sticky about the rules/guidelines for the authentication thread, we simply state that we cannot have an ongoing exchange about these requests and that after an opinion is given. If there is no additional photographic evidence to show, there will be no more discussion and to take the opinion for exactly what it is and proceed at your own risk. Further discussion will be ignored, and so will PM's. In the sticky, can we include a comment about "what to do when you disagree aka purchase at your own risk" so our dear authenticators might not have to deal with endless arguing by an opposing view?

Perhaps we need to adopt different language for responses. Instead of saying what we H lovers really feel, "DISGUSTING HIDEOUS FAKE!!!", we should say "I cannot endorse" or "I am uncomfortable" or "I have concerns" - something innocuous like that. And leave it at that. Considering that authenticators are only going off of the evidence they can find from a computer, it conveys the opinion, leaves room for error and doesn't feel like an attack. KWIM?

I shudder to think what the poor authenticators have to deal with in regard to endless annoying PMs on opinions they render.

If more helping members could put the link to the proposed sticky in the signature or paste at the end of any AT thread post, it would further remind newbies on where to go for the thread rules/guidelines.

I think there should be a limit to the number of items requested at a time. I nearly did a spit-take at a recent one for four in one post. One at a time would be much cleaner and easier for those responding. It's just too much to request by one person for a free service.

Further, I am new to this side of the forum, and wonder if current authenticators approve new ones? I am not going to ask to be one, but maybe this needs to be publicly posted so people know the "rules of the road". Non-authenticators can help in limited ways, and if they could define what is acceptable, it might help explain how we can assist without stepping on toes.

I have tried to help by referring people to the format and searching for previous commentary on a bag. I respect that I'm not an authenticator, so I say so when commenting ("I'm not an authenticator, but your wallet doesn't look like either of mine"). I try to weed through the onslaught of newbies who don't search, don't use the format and don't come prepared for a authentication request. Like an assistant would do. Maybe approved authenticators could have their screen names in a different color?

 

[Sammyjoe]

What are the downsides to not having a AT thread??

Imagine if the thread was no longer here, would that be so bad?

I think the Auth people and Mods and Megs/Vlad will have a conversation and come up with a clear plan. Which we can all follow.

Just my view.

 

[Prada Psycho]

Imagine if the thread was no longer here, would that be so bad?

In a word: YES!!!

 

[Cavalier Girl]

In a word: YES!!!

I agree with Prada Psycho. I don't take anyone's word as gospal when it comes to authentications, but it sure helps me make a more educated decision.

Ultimately, we're each responsible for any H purchase we make outside an H boutique.

CG

 

[Sammyjoe]

Lol, ok, I just thought it would be interesting to put it out there.

I feel we are very lucky to have the thread and I also think we are very lucky to have the ladies that authenticate.

 

[oregonfanlisa]

Title I'd like to see in new Authentication Thread:
"Hermes Authentication Thread - read the rules before making request"

Topics I'd like to see in the proposed sticky for Authentication Thread Rules/Guidelines:

Caveat Emptor, "Let the buyer beware"
- caution about buying from anyplace other than directly from Hermes
- opinions of authenticators are only opinions of volunteers and no
- proceed at own risk
- tips how to research your seller
- links to helpful threads on the forum
- obvious signs of caution
+ 0 feedback
+ method of payment
+ hard to believe or long drawn out sad story with auction/sale
+ ridiculously low selling price
+ obvious problems with item and cost of any repair will be high

Before you make a request for service
- how to search for previous discussions in authentication thread

Who can authenticate
- they are volunteers
- respected, in good standing, members of tPF

How to make a request
- format
- photographs authenticators would like to see

Why the format is required
- this information is needed to make a judgement
- makes searching for historical information work

Limit to one request per member
- one at a time

What if you disagree with opinions in thread?
- unless you have more photographs, there will be no further discourse after opinion is given
- do not argue with opinions
- do not post personal information
- do not PM the authenticators unless they approach you first
- there is only so much a volunteer authenticator can do from the computer
- the only absolute opinion is that of an Hermes craftsman
- proceed at your own risk or buy direct from a boutique

**I'm still thinking about how to approach the people who buy first and ask for an opinion after the fact other than calling them out for their obvious risky buying practices.

 

[capulet]

I am an avid reader of the AT thread but don't often post because I'm not qualified to authenticate and I don't buy much besides scarves, which I usually feel comfortable authenticating for myself.

Anyway, in addition to everyone's thoughtful comments, I have one suggestion. I'm not sure even I think it's a good idea, but here it is: what if (if possible) the AT thread were limited to people with PM status? It's not a high threshold, but it is a way of (hopefully) limiting AT requests to people who have been around long enough to familiarize themselves with TPF a little, would prevent the continuation of discussions on the thread that should really be taken to PM but can't because one side doesn't have PM status yet, and would contain AT requests to people who are in some sense a part of the TPF community--I mean, I think it is fair for people who authenticate to offer their services first of all to people who have some stake here other than getting things authenticated. But all hopefully without getting too clique-ish (and the strength of this board is that it is so open to enthusiastic newbies). The only problem I can think of offhand (and I'm sure there might be others because I haven't thought about it that long) is that non-member sellers who discover they're being discussed here and come here to defend themselves wouldn't be able to post, but then usually those discussions don't lead to anything productive anyhow.

Anyway, that's my two cents, for what it's worth, and whatever our opinions I love all you guys.

 

[merika]

What are the downsides to not having a AT thread??

Imagine if the thread was no longer here, would that be so bad?

I think the Auth people and Mods and Megs/Vlad will have a conversation and come up with a clear plan. Which we can all follow.

Just my view.

Members here, especially people who are new to Hermes would have to take great personal risk in buying from unknown entities. If you're looking for a Hermes, can't afford to or don't want to pay the store price, how are you going to even know whether you are getting an authentic bag off of ebay or elsewhere?

The only alternative would be, as gga said, to hire someone personally and ask them to authenticate it for you. They charge by the hour.

 

[SCL]

Perhaps we need to adopt different language for responses. Instead of saying what we H lovers really feel, "DISGUSTING HIDEOUS FAKE!!!", we should say "I cannot endorse" or "I am uncomfortable" or "I have concerns" - something innocuous like that. And leave it at that. Considering that authenticators are only going off of the evidence they can find from a computer, it conveys the opinion, leaves room for error and doesn't feel like an attack. KWIM?

Lisa, Many excellent points. I think this one is very important... "I am unsure" or a like statement seems quite appropriate in circumstances where authenticators do not have enough/complete information and it is less heated/controversial than other potential responses.

 

[Sammyjoe]

I understand you Merika.

I think instead of resorting to getting someone to Authenticate which as been pointed out will cost money. How about the rules Oreganfanlisa and others have mooted.

I am going to say no more, I just enjoy the site and hope that the Vets and Mods come up with a plan that everyone is happy with and works.

 

[oregonfanlisa]

I have one suggestion. I'm not sure even I think it's a good idea, but here it is: what if (if possible) the AT thread were limited to people with PM status? It's not a high threshold, but it is a way of (hopefully) limiting AT requests to people who have been around long enough to familiarize themselves with TPF a little, would prevent the continuation of discussions on the thread that should really be taken to PM but can't because one side doesn't have PM status yet, and would contain AT requests to people who are in some sense a part of the TPF community--I mean, I think it is fair for people who authenticate to offer their services first of all to people who have some stake here other than getting things authenticated. But all hopefully without getting too clique-ish (and the strength of this board is that it is so open to enthusiastic newbies). The only problem I can think of offhand (and I'm sure there might be others because I haven't thought about it that long) is that non-member sellers who discover they're being discussed here and come here to defend themselves wouldn't be able to post, but then usually those discussions don't lead to anything productive anyhow.

Very interesting idea. I wonder how many people who post on the authentication thread first come to stay and participate in the forum? Is this a huge draw for new active membership?

 

[Perigord]

What are the downsides to not having a AT thread??

Imagine if the thread was no longer here, would that be so bad?

I think the Auth people and Mods and Megs/Vlad will have a conversation and come up with a clear plan. Which we can all follow.

Just my view.

In another word--totally! This is one of the lynchpins of the H forum.

And I find myself leaning against many more rules. Limiting it to certain people? That would exlude the neediest--the newest and most naive. This should be a leaning place for all.

I don't even mind multiple requests. Someone may need to compare two bags. I like it best when we are sensible and wonderfully self-moderating. If it seems like too much we can gently ask that they limit their requests. I remember the request with 4 items--my only complaint was that they did not include links, which meant far more search steps for the authenticators.

I don't even really like limiting language. Sometimes "fakeroo" (you know who you are!) and hideous fake really hit the mark!! I gotta say I have been a great fan of the humor as well as the authenticating--don't want this to turn into a dry site with a chill on colorful speech. I would learn less, and enjoy less!

 

[gga]

I want to take a moment here to digress and say the following:

I Perigord!!!!! (Please note that extensive !!s indicate my sincerity)

and also

I merika!!!!!!

Okay, done with digression now.

 

[dressage queen]

I have to be honest, I did not realize there was an issue with this until a few days ago. I was not contacted about it until then so I had no idea. Right now Vlad and I are trying to see what can be helpful for all people involved.

i'm going to be brutally honest, and i'm confident that it will be taken by all in the constructively critical sprirt in which it is intended.

i don't think there was a problem of any serious significance until the episode in question. sure, people post without checking whether an item has already been discussed, don't check whether the seller is on the reputable list, don't use the preferred format after being requested to do so, argue over opinions . . . it can be tedious, but it's all manageable.

but seasoned authenticators were presented with a clearly fake bag and from someone who was intending to sell it and a story that whether you looked at it up, down or sideways could NOT have been true. now, i ask you to put yourself in the place of these people who spend hours daily dealing with fakes and scammers - it's not really surprising that the immediate reaction would be to call this blatantly fallacious story out as such.

could it have been done less harshly? probably. but, again being brutally honest, i think the people who spend all that time and energy providing a valuable free service would have liked a little more understanding rather than a public dressing down. when one looks at fake after fake and hears story after story of people who were taken in by them, that person may be prone to see con attempts. and frankly that person will also be prone to be able to detect them and protect others from falling prey to them. if we want people capable of authenticating bags and detecting scams i think we need to give them the freedom to call them as they see them. and personally i WANT scammers to know that if they come here and try to play us with a story, they are going to be called out on it but good. is it really that much to ask members to be a little understanding on that front?

and as far as the characterization of that thread being unfriendly and unwelcoming, i find that unfair. we do ask people to use a format and we always let them know about it politely when they're new. we don't ignore requests not in that format, but they do sometimes get overlooked - one of the reasons we like the format is it makes it easy to spot the authentication requests. and had and established tPF member been asking about the bag in question, the response would have been quite different - but as presented from a brand new person asking about selling it, it stunk to high heaven.

by the way, while i do dabble in authentication i'm really speaking on behalf of the regulars who spend SO much time doing it. i think they deserve better, and i think that we need to try to understand where they're coming from - to walk the proverbial mile in their shoes before rendering judgment.

finally, i do understand and respect that this is a megs and vlad playground and you make the rules - i'll abide by whatever you decide. but i am personally not in favor of an authenticate thread that is clinical and devoid of all banter. the AT thread can be enjoyable, and i'm sure i'm not the only person who spends time there because of that. if it becomes too dry, and there are too many rules as to what authenticators can and cannot say the i suspect it will become a yawn with much less participation. i do hope that's not the direction you choose to take. but i think it's a smashing idea to try to overhaul the procedure to make it more user-friendly for everyone.

 

[capulet]

Very interesting idea. I wonder how many people who post on the authentication thread first come to stay and participate in the forum? Is this a huge draw for new active membership?

That's a good question. I mean, I really don't want to discourage anyone who will post according to the rules, but I also think the rules are already pretty much implicit and a lot of new posters just don't take the time to figure them out--which is understandable, I guess that's easy to say from the perspective of someone who's been here a while. But I think it's a good idea on ANY forum to familiarize yourself with the environment a little bit before jumping in, so if people had to do that to post on the AT thread it would save the authenticators some headaches. (I'm sure the sticky will help--I just hope people read it!) But at the same time I agree with Perigord--I don't want to anyone to make a regrettable purchase because they couldn't post on the AT thread, and I don't want to discourage anyone for whom the AT thread might be a gateway to TPF and learning about H.

The other problem I thought of with my idea is that a lot of TPFers who sell on eBay refer buyers to the AT thread, so it would kind of stink for them if potential buyers who were new here couldn't post about those items.