tPF authenticator discussion

[deacc]

I like the idea of an Authenticate This forum where all threads are housed. I think we once considered this and for some reason we decided against it - but I like the idea. I like having it all in one place, easy to find, and all like threads together. Right now it can def be hard to find as the threads are floating in different areas of each sub.

We def want all of the ideas you guys have! You use the forum, you are good with the different threads, so you know exactly what you think would make it better for you. There's no better feedback than that!

I actually prefer the authentication forum situated where it is now plus, in a sense, we already have it all in one place already through the "Authenticate This" announcement that is labeled important in each forum. FYI, this is the post I am talking about http://forum.purseblog.com/announcement.php?f=15&a=35

I dare you to try to find the Coach AT thread!

Aren't all AT thread of each brand housed under the sub-forums "Brand" shopping? (if it exists) I know that's the case for LV and Balenciaga.

One thing we would like to add to the Authenticate This threads to start is having a 500 post minimum requirement before someone can authenticate.

We believe having a posting minimum will not only deter people who don't have the proper knowledge to authenticate, but will also give members a chance to get accustomed to the forums and areas, see how they work, and then if they meet that requirement of 500 posts and they have the proper knowledge to help authenticate they can step in.

I'd like to add this to each of the threads and we can start modding in this way going forward. We do think it will help with some of the new members authenticating issues. I am sure many new members may have a lot of knowledge, but I think for the comfort of the community and to learn the ropes, the members should be very comfortable here and have been here a while before they can begin.

Hope this is a positive step forward for many of you!!

I think a 500 post minimum is a good idea as a first step to deter people from random authentication. I also think it will be a good idea on the first post of each AT thread to give a list of trusted authenticators.

 

[Swanky]

I actually prefer the authentication forum situated where it is now plus, in a sense, we already have it all in one place already through the "Authenticate This" announcement that is labeled important in each forum. FYI, this is the post I am talking about http://forum.purseblog.com/announcement.php?f=15&a=35

Aren't all AT thread of each brand housed under the sub-forums "Brand" shopping? (if it exists) I know that's the case for LV and Balenciaga.

I think a 500 post minimum is a good idea as a first step to deter people from random authentication. I also think it will be a good idea on the first post of each AT thread to give a list of trusted authenticators.

I agree and yes, they're all under "shopping" in their home forums. We changed it to this because we had it the other way and it didn't make as much sense.

Remember, most members here have no interest in being an "authenticator". We've had a pretty low number of issues w/ new people doing it. So the 500 post minimum is a great start IMO and I think we'll see very few issues of this problem now.

I know there's other issues this won't resolve but they're willing to continue to problem solve.


Someone said something about mods looking uniform, you can always spot a mod or admin as our user names are colorful

 

[JustAgUrL]

Sorry ignore me I misread.... I'm way to tired 😩

No worries, I've been there too…

 

[jellyv]

I actually prefer the authentication forum situated where it is now plus, in a sense, we already have it all in one place already through the "Authenticate This" announcement that is labeled important in each forum.

I agree. People tend to hang out in a given brand forum, so it seems logical to me to place the Authentication thread in its "home" area on the site. The current problem isn't where the thread is but the enforcement of who speaks with authority within it.

 

[vintagebags4me]

I am glad to see the forum continuing this discussion - as I mentioned, I have read for years but didn't feel compelled to post until I saw this discussion. While having a 500+ posting minimum for authenticators is a good idea - I still think the trusted authenticators should be called out somehow - I know many of the names just from reading on the various AT threads but I'm still looking for the Gucci authenticator who I think is on break. And I agree with the earlier discussion - authenticating without necessary pictures should not be allowed. Thank you to the authenticators who work hard to keep up the reputation of tPF. It is appreciated.

 

[Megs]

I totally concur. The content of the posts and knowledge of the brand is vital especially the latter.

That goes without saying! . As I said in a previous post, we truly do not have an issue with hoards of people coming into authenticate this threads trying to authenticate when they shouldn't be. We have some that do this, here and there, and we are making sure we are on top of it and if that person authenticates egregiously, we delete and ask them to stop.

I don't think many people want to go into a thread and authenticate when they don't know what they are doing. If I think of doing that, it makes me so uncomfortable because I don't have proper knowledge, and most people probably feel this way as well!

I also think you should put a minimum requirement on when a member is allowed to use the AT thread, maybe not as much as 500. It just deters people from JUST taking advantage of the AT on PF. I just want people who use this free service to at least explore PF a bit more, appreciate its member and its existence and possibly engage in the subforums. It has to be a two-way street. Getting to know the forum and its members better could possibly improve on the respect aspect, something some of the authenticators are seeking as well.

I know quite a few people have suggested this previously, but I can say that we will not be doing this.

It is up to each authenticator to decide if they want to help someone or not - for whatever their reason may be. It may be because the person is brand new, or the person isn't asking properly, or the person is a reseller that the authenticator doesn't want to help. It can be whatever reason, each authentciator can choose who they'd like to help or not help.

Swanky Mama has been very helpful to us authenticators in Michael Kors thread, with newbies coming along and giving out incorrect evaluations. She has been very good about taking care of that problem and it virtually solves it for us, by just removing their comments.

I think the way you have it now is working just fine, with all the authenticators for each brand being pinned to the top of each brand's forum. We have never had one complaint about being difficult to find.

HOWEVER, I personally think that 500 posts before being able to get an evaluation is something we need to seriously discuss. There are pros and cons to this, and I will tell you mine and then you tell me if I am off track, or what you think.

I personally don't think there is anything wrong with folks joining this forum to get an authentication. I do understand this might hurt professional authenticators that have businesses. So it makes sense in that regard. I have actually been sending new members here that are getting so much incorrect information off of facebook and other venues, misleading guides, etc. These people need help! What is the harm in sending them here, as long as they do not start authenticating! ?? I believe THAT is where we need to draw the line. Stating that no one under 500 posts is allowed to comment on authentications, should suffice and perhaps that can be in the user agreement, when they join?

But if they are here for an evaluation, why not give it to them? I agree with others here stating, "what in fact are others exactly 'contributing' because they have 500 posts??" For what? Oooh, aahhh, and I love that color?? lol! What contribution is that really??

I appreciate what you are trying to do by stopping these newbies from authentications, but I see no harm what so ever, in new members coming here to keep from getting ripped off by these criminal counterfeiters. I have faith that if we help them, they will stay on this forum and feel safe here. I often brag that this is a 'safe haven' for those of us that don't want to support the counterfeiting business. Why would we want to make it easier for the counterfeiters to sell their goods, by waiting so long to give folks an evaluation?

I think the TPF is perfect the way it is! Just allow us to keep reporting newbie authenticators, and that should continue to solve that problem. Newbies need to know to show respect for the long time authenticators here, not stepping on their toes, and not arguing with us on our threads. When I first started authenticating here, I contacted the present authenticators in private messaging, , after I had proven to them that I knew the bags really well, and I ASKED them, if they appreciated my input or not! If they dod NOT approve it first, I would have went away! I did NOT just start throwing out evaluations as a new member! I can't believe anyone does this! I think it is very disrespectful to the long time evaluaters here and shows total disregard for their positions! This is NOT facebook, where you can just do what ever you please, and even facebook has rules.

By continuing to remove their posts, this basically solves the problem. No need to cause a new problem , trying to solve an old one. I think not allowing authentications until 500 posts are made, is just going to send people to other forums. Why not keep them here?? Why not keep this the biggest and the best, with the most members?? Am I missing something here??
JMHO

I know someone else responded, but I wanted to as well. The idea is that we make a rule that to be an authenticator, you need to have 500 posts.

A person with 1 post can still ask for authentication help.

Agree. When someone comes here to ask for advice or an authentication, we need to encourage that. And, encourage them to explore the site and learn and participate and have fun!

I think so too!

I think CinthiaZ was reading/remembering the other commenter's post asking about a 500 post requirement for people seeking authentications. (Not Megs.) I completely agree, that I have no problem with brand new members coming here for authentications. I think that is much better than them ending up with a counterfeit. It's when someone has been a member for a while and only seems to be using the free service time and time again, without participating, that has warranted a comment or gentle reminder about authentications being a service preferably offered just to our active members.

I think a 500 post minimum is a decent start Megs, thank you. I just worry very much about that verbiage being added to the rules, if reading that will spark the idea in others or new members wondering if they CAN start "authenticating" once they have enough posts. When maybe they still shouldn't be. I have seen newer members come in and post 40 or 50 comments a day, so really 500 isn't much at all. I think it's far more important to change/increase some brand-knowledgeable moderating abilities across the forum, or add wording/disclaimers at the top of EACH page of the AT threads regarding that thread's mods/current contributors. So that it reads less like a free-for-all for the majority of people, who don't read page "1" If contributors or mods alter in any way or if someone's doing well and added to the list of people who know what they are doing, or if authenticators leave.. it could be revised with each new fresh thread starting up when the old one gets full/closed. Just a thought. I think if authenticators do feel they have a little bit more mod-response/control, then they won't ever again feel too overly frustrated, and stick around.

I truly don't think we will have that problem. We've had no rule about how many posts you need to have to be an authenticator right now and it's still a few cases that are problems for newbies authenticating. Majority of people are not going to feel comfortable or want to authenticate when they do not have proper background and knowledge of the brand. If they do come in and authenticate improperly, we will still be deleting those posts and asking the person to refrain from authenticating.

 

[cdtracing]

I actually prefer the authentication forum situated where it is now plus, in a sense, we already have it all in one place already through the "Authenticate This" announcement that is labeled important in each forum. FYI, this is the post I am talking about http://forum.purseblog.com/announcement.php?f=15&a=35


Aren't all AT thread of each brand housed under the sub-forums "Brand" shopping? (if it exists) I know that's the case for LV and Balenciaga.


I think a 500 post minimum is a good idea as a first step to deter people from random authentication. I also think it will be a good idea on the first post of each AT thread to give a list of trusted authenticators.

I agree and yes, they're all under "shopping" in their home forums. We changed it to this because we had it the other way and it didn't make as much sense.

Remember, most members here have no interest in being an "authenticator". We've had a pretty low number of issues w/ new people doing it. So the 500 post minimum is a great start IMO and I think we'll see very few issues of this problem now.

I know there's other issues this won't resolve but they're willing to continue to problem solve.


Someone said something about mods looking uniform, you can always spot a mod or admin as our user names are colorful

I agree as well. Seems like most people got to the brand forum they're interested in, anyway, especially if they seek an authentication of a particular item.

I like the idea of having a 500 minimum post count before a member can start authenticating & think it will resolve a lot of the new members posting their "opinions" in the AT threads. That doesn't mean members participating on the AT threads can't post things like "you will need to post the link to the sale for evaluation" or "you need to post the required pictures listed in 1st post" or other helpful hints to guide new members who are not following the format. This is the kind of help that is so appreciated to keep us from have to repeat ourselves over & over. I have noticed some of the higher traffic premiere designer threads have members that help out in this way. It also doesn't mean that a member would have to have 500 posts before seeking an evaluation. I don't mind a first time member asking for an evaluation; it's when newbies post for authentications then turn around & start telling other seeking evaluation that their item looks good, or it has red flags, or there's a problem with this one, or it's authentic. That's where the problems start.

 

[LouisieAnna]

Buyer here, not authenticator. Would it help to have no post requirements to post an active auction listing for authentication, and a minimum post requirement and approval from the authenticators to post pieces for authentication from closed listings or other sources? The goal would be to cut down on sellers looking for freebies, but still allow legitimate non-auction questions. I think many buyers may find it frustrating that only active auctions can be posted in many brands. Legitimate miracles do happen; a lot of people get lucky at garage sales, and I found a brand new authentic Burberry at GW a few weeks ago.

Eta: Is it possible for authenticators in the really busy brands to approve buyers that meet a minimum post requirement that want non-active auction authentications? Or is cutting down on traffic part of the reason for the restriction, in addition to weeding out sellers looking to abuse the AT threads?

 

[JustAgUrL]

Buyer here, not authenticator. Would it help to have no post requirements to post an active listing for authentication, and a minimum post requirement and approval from the authenticators to post pieces for authentication from closed listings or other sources to cut down on sellers looking for freebies, but still allow legitimate non-auction questions? I think many buyers may find it frustrating that only active auctions can be posted in many brands. Legitimate miracles do happen; a lot of people get lucky at garage sales, and I found a brand new authentic Burberry at GW a few weeks ago.

Eta: Is it possible for authenticators in the really busy brands to approve buyers that want non-active auction authentications? Or is cutting down on traffic part of the reason for the restriction, in addition to weeding out sellers looking to abuse the AT threads?

That might get a bit too complicated…
people can hardly follow the rules now…

and no, you NEVER want to cut down on traffic…
just want to cut down on NEW people providing Authentications
and cut down on people acting entitled…

and have new people come here, treating ALL the people with respect…

 

[cdtracing]

That might get a bit too complicated…
people can hardly follow the rules now…

and no, you NEVER want to cut down on traffic…
just want to cut down on NEW people providing Authentications
and cut down on people acting entitled…

and have new people come here, treating ALL the people with respect…

Exactly!!

 

[LouisieAnna]

That might get a bit too complicated…
people can hardly follow the rules now…

and no, you NEVER want to cut down on traffic…
just want to cut down on NEW people providing Authentications
and cut down on people acting entitled…

and have new people come here, treating ALL the people with respect…

It seems to me there won't be an option of not following the rules in the future, if there is a form to be filled out for active auction listing authentication requests. I mean a second, authenticator approved system for non-active auction listing requests, that maybe newbies can't even see until they meet the post count requirement. Just thinking outloud. I think it would be a shame to arbitrarily limit all authentication requests in the new system to active auction listings only, if that is even the plan.

I certainly don't want to cut down on traffic. I'm probably too cynical for my own good in wondering if that isn't part of the reason for the draconian rules of some of the AT threads.

 

[JustAgUrL]

It seems to me there won't be an option of not following the rules in the future, if there is a form to be filled out for active auction listing authentication requests. I mean a second, authenticator approved system for non-active auction listing requests, that maybe newbies can't even see until they meet the post count requirement. Just thinking outloud. I think it would be a shame to arbitrarily limit all authentication requests in the new system to active auction listings only, if that is even the plan.

I certainly don't want to cut down on traffic. I'm probably too cynical for my own good in wondering if that isn't part of the reason for the draconian rules of some of the AT threads.

about 3 Pages back I think it is, ZestyPasta wrote a great reply
with the reasons why some of the AT threads
have more rules than others…

I will see if I can find it….


Here it is….. Page 26- Post Number 381 - Zestypasta

I often wondered why many authenticators insisted in active participation and a live auction link before they would give an opinion. Then, one said recently it is to deter resellers from coming here to authenticate their wares, rather than paying money to have their items authenticated and practicing their own due diligence. Also, it is grating to have people come here ONLY to authenticate items they are trying to buy. It takes an incredible amount of time for authenticators to check links, photos, advise, REPEAT THEMSELVES over and over asking for proper format, research to stay ahead of counterfeiters, and the myriad if other things they do that I am I awe of (just found out about most if it, and am just so grateful for them providing this service). They do this for this lovely community and fellow members, and it ticks me off to see people with no interest in giving something in return. They even let most of them continue to take advantage, just being kind and avoiding petulant drama, and simply say...hey, maybe stick around and join in...

But some of these folks are egregious. I clicked on one name recently that was declined an LV authentication and rightly so, they had over a hundred posts, and they were ALL authentication requests over a few years!

 

[LouisieAnna]

about 3 Pages back I think it is, ZestyPasta wrote a great reply
with the reasons why some of the AT threads
have more rules than others…

I will see if I can find it….

Post #381? If so, it seems to me it concerns the current forum set up, and I'm concerned about the future use of forms to be filled out.

 

[littlerock]

It seems to me there won't be an option of not following the rules in the future, if there is a form to be filled out for active auction listing authentication requests. I mean a second, authenticator approved system for non-active auction listing requests, that maybe newbies can't even see until they meet the post count requirement. Just thinking outloud. I think it would be a shame to arbitrarily limit all authentication requests in the new system to active auction listings only, if that is even the plan.

I certainly don't want to cut down on traffic. I'm probably too cynical for my own good in wondering if that isn't part of the reason for the draconian rules of some of the AT threads.

There is not going to be a minimum requirement for newbies to obtain authenitcations. There are other things in the works, to help the flow, and the authenticator's community in general, but I'm not sure "forms" are a part of that yet.

 

[LouisieAnna]

There is not going to be a minimum requirement for newbies to obtain authenitcations. There are other things in the works, to help the flow, and the authenticator's community in general, but I'm not sure "forms" are a part of that yet.

Ok, thanks. I'll stop borrowing trouble, then.