DISCUSS the Hermes AT Thread

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

Status
Not open for further replies.
#64
ah, but you see, in the G-verse, if you get more than 1 "!", then you are on equal footing with all other preferred G-verse inhabitants. There's no Orwellian "all are equal, but some are more equal than others" in the G-verse. Oh no. I adore P equally with M. And with DQ. And some other initials too.

ETA: Just reread this and am realizing that the cold meds I'm taking are fuzzing my brain.
 
#65
dressage queen said:
I'm going to be brutally honest, and I'm confident that it will be taken by all in the constructively critical spirit in which it is intended.

i don't think there was a problem of any 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.
Click to expand...


I so agree with these comments, if its too strict and full of rules, it would be like having to be a data entering clerk! and I like to have a giggle sometimes.

My concern is right now members who are/ were the backbone of the thread are not there, and I think they have been treated very badly, and understand fully why they are using their time doing something else right now.

The dispute should not of been made public it should of been through PM
It devalued the members publicly and no one should have to put up with being given a slapped wrist and humiliated on a public forum when they have devoted so much of their time and knowledge asking for nothing in return except a little respect.

Those members have saved people thousands of dollars from buying fakes along with the horror of sweatshops,organized crime etc that is behind the counterfeit industry, I really think they deserve so much more.

BTW I :heart: Periodgard too:smile1: and DQ:smile1: and lots of others
 
#68
You all make excellent and valid points. Just a comment about my suggestion for rules/guidelines which are aimed at requestors and are not meant to confine or constrict authenticators.

Newbies come in here time after time and have no clue what to do. Authenticators and others end up cluttering the thread with endless & tiring reminders of posting with the format, supplying more pictures, researching first, already been discussed, blah, blah, blah. If we had a place that summed up all the very important facts that we see repeated over and over, it would make things alot more streamlined and efficient, AND would allow for banter and fun (which I thoroughly enjoy!!).

I also worry about burnout and lack of appreciation for authenticators who could make so much better use of their time if they weren't constantly dealing with the same stuff over and over, and could just make their valued and appreciated opinions efficiently.

I also didn't like what happened and took it up by PM as I think that's where it belonged in the first place.

:heart::heart::heart:
 
#70
dressage queen said:
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.
Click to expand...


:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:

Can I get an AMEN from the gallery?! :okay:
 
#71
wow wow wow.....

thanks to all of you for the great posts on this matter. I too agree that the AT thread is important. Admitedly, I suffered a bit of a burnout myself, but I still would like to respond briefly....

I dont want to repeat too much of what has been said here, but i would like to chime in and say that some guidelines on the process would be helpful not only to this brand, but others as well. perhaps ALL OF these authenticate threads could be private until the user checks a box somewhere that says, " i have read these guidelines" I know it would be more work for vlad, and maybe untenable, but it would take some of the load off the board in the longrun, I think.

also, i do want to agree with DQ and others that the dressing down on the AT thread might have been best done by PM. That would have given the authenticators the opportunity to post again if they wished to soften their response....I was about to mouth off myself but was called away.

i am all over the place in this post, but lastly i want to please request that any authenticate guidelines include the rule to not contact members directly by PM to ask for authentications off the board. I got completely burned out by those requests, particularly from new members...i dont mind opining for my homies but requests for several scarves to be authenticated for someone I never interacted with in any thread by PM were a bit exhausting....

Oh, and this is really the last point....lets keep the humor in the thread, if we can. a "heinous smelly fake" sounds more amusing than "likely not authentic" and i think we need all the humor we can get some days.....the suggestion was good, but as a veteran of two Hermes AT threads, I can say that we really do need a good laugh.

oops, i guess that wasn't "briefly......"
 
#72
Prada Psycho said:
:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:

Can I get an AMEN from the gallery?! :okay:
Click to expand...

Amen%20Close.jpg
 
#73
CobaltBlu said:
I dont want to repeat too much of what has been said here, but i would like to chime in and say that some guidelines on the process would be helpful not only to this brand, but others as well. perhaps ALL OF these authenticate threads could be private until the user checks a box somewhere that says, " i have read these guidelines" I know it would be more work for vlad, and maybe untenable, but it would take some of the load off the board in the longrun, I think.
Click to expand...

Oh yes! This is loads better than my idea.

And I agree with everyone who says the AT thread could be kept lighthearted--after all, that's one of the main reasons I read it.
 
#74
Sammyjoe said:
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.
Click to expand...

OMG! It would be REAL bad. This is an amazing service that has saved countless numbers among us from making costly mistakes!
 
#75
ardneish said:
I so agree with these comments, if its too strict and full of rules, it would be like having to be a data entering clerk! and I like to have a giggle sometimes.

My concern is right now members who are/ were the backbone of the thread are not there, and I think they have been treated very badly, and understand fully why they are using their time doing something else right now.

The dispute should not of been made public it should of been through PM
It devalued the members publicly and no one should have to put up with being given a slapped wrist and humiliated on a public forum when they have devoted so much of their time and knowledge asking for nothing in return except a little respect.

Those members have saved people thousands of dollars from buying fakes along with the horror of sweatshops,organized crime etc that is behind the counterfeit industry, I really think they deserve so much more.

BTW I :heart: Periodgard too:smile1: and DQ:smile1: and lots of others
Click to expand...

Great points and well said!:tup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top