tPF authenticator discussion

[Megs]

I still really feel that overall, tPF is a very friendly community that while large still has very kind members. Of course we get some people that are not well suited for the forum, and if they do not get banned immediately, they eventually will because they prove that they are not a good fit here.

With so many members, we have a system in place to monitor issues that we see. Is it perfect? No, definitely not. And we are working on changing it. But overall it has given me and Vlad a good birds eye view of what's happening.

I think some people tend to be more straight forward than others, some are harsher, and some people are just rude. This happens in our daily lives and here too. But like I said before, we want to make sure this is a fun and kind place for people

 

[Prada Psycho]

I don't recall reading any post in this thread that indicated that only authenticators get nastygrams and points. The reason it's a sore spot with authenticators is when they come about because of something on AT threads (when we're giving our FREE time and expertise to help out people) and end up getting sent to tPF detention when we defend ourselves against the parade of jerks that migrate onto the AT threads.

Authenticate because you enjoy it and get satisfaction from helping others.....when that feeling goes away I would step back from it and decide whether or not it's something worth pursuing.
If it's causing undue stress in your life and it's something that you're voluntarily doing (which it undoubtedly is)then it's time to be selfish and decide whether you want to continue.
GLD, there are many on the AT forums who would hope that most AT's would want to continue offering this service.

That is not at ALL what I said in my post above....

This place is hardly a source of undue stress since I can come and go at my own choosing. If if were "undoubtedly" causing me stress, I wouldn't be having this conversation with you at the moment.

 

[alansgail]

That is not at ALL what I said in my post above....

This place is hardly a source of undue stress since I can come and go at my own choosing. If if were "undoubtedly" causing me stress, I wouldn't be having this conversation with you at the moment.

Sorry, I should have said I was NOT talking about any one person in particular.
It seems there's always something one forgets to say that won't ruffle someone's feathers.
Have a great night.....glad you're still happy to be an authenticator.

 

[Prada Psycho]

Sorry, I should have said I was NOT talking about any one person in particular.
It seems there's always something one forgets to say that won't ruffle someone's feathers.
Have a great night.....glad you're still happy to be an authenticator.

It's fairly helpful to not misquote, misinterpret and also to proofread before submitting one's posts.

 

[alansgail]

It's fairly helpful to not misquote, misinterpret and also to proofread before submitting one's posts.

Thanks for the slap down, this is beyond ridiculous at this point. Wish their weren't so many angry people posting on here. Makes it very hard to have a conversation.

 

[storeberry]

It's fairly helpful to not misquote, misinterpret and also to proofread before submitting one's posts.

Thanks for the slap down, this is beyond ridiculous at this point. Wish their weren't so many angry people posting on here. Makes it very hard to have a conversation.

Ermm... What is so angry about this post? And why are you so angry with the authenticators? I find it strange that you are insisting authenticators to stop authenticating if they are burned out or stressed. I mean we work everyday and we have our fair share of grievances, do we because we are frustrated & quit the next day? I mean they help in their own time & if someone comes along & demand this & that, can't they complain or grumble abit?

 

[charleston-mom]

It's fairly helpful to not misquote, misinterpret and also to proofread before submitting one's posts.

Great post!!!

 

[BeenBurned]

If it's causing undue stress in your life and it's something that you're voluntarily doing (which it undoubtedly is) then it's time to be selfish and decide whether you want to continue.
GLD, there are many on the AT forums who would hope that most AT's would want to continue offering this service.

Some may see the fact that one's been on here for so very long as possibly being "burned out" and tired of it all. It's totally not fair to take a newbies post and turn it into something based on "experience" etc. Sometimes newcomers can have a fresh spin on things that can be positively enlightening if given the chance.
This is kind of reminding me of an "old boys' club" kind of mentality.
Not flattering.

It seems there's always something one forgets to say that won't ruffle someone's feathers.
Have a great night.....glad you're still happy to be an authenticator.

Thanks for the slap down, this is beyond ridiculous at this point. Wish their weren't so many angry people posting on here. Makes it very hard to have a conversation.

For someone who came here saying she doesn't use the authenticators on the AT forums and instead advocates for a company whose track record is in the toilet, you have hijacked (many times) a helpful and informative thread that is looking to improve the AT forums for those who DO use them.

I'll only speak for myself when I say that it gets old to repeatedly be told that we shouldn't be here if we don't love authenticating, we should act professional instead of letting adversarial posters frustrate us, ignore those adversarial posters (though some of the posters here seem unable to follow their own advice), walk away if we're burned out and generally offer suggestions on improving our personalities.

I'm not sure why posters who clearly dislike some of the authenticators and don't use our services keep coming back.

Frankly, I'd like to see this thread get back on topic hashing out ways to keep the few authenticators who are still here and make the AT forums work for those members and authenticators who DO use them.

 

[alansgail]

For someone who came here saying she doesn't use the authenticators on the AT forums and instead advocates for a company whose track record is in the toilet, you have hijacked (many times) a helpful and informative thread that is looking to improve the AT forums for those who DO use them.

I'll only speak for myself when I say that it gets old to repeatedly be told that we shouldn't be here if we don't love authenticating, we should act professional instead of letting adversarial posters frustrate us, ignore those adversarial posters (though some of the posters here seem unable to follow their own advice), walk away if we're burned out and generally offer suggestions on improving our personalities.

I'm not sure why posters who clearly dislike some of the authenticators and don't use our services keep coming back.

Frankly, I'd like to see this thread get back on topic hashing out ways to keep the few authenticators who are still here and make the AT forums work for those members and authenticators who DO use them.

nm

 

[threadbender]

BeenBurned, agree.

I want to repeat that, if someone's posts bother anyone, use the ignore feature. It is quite helpful for the most part. Except, when the post is quoted. lol
I do believe the authenticators could use that feature if a poster refuses to follow the protocols set up in a given AT. I would hope it would not be until after a number of issues, but it is there. The authenticators are volunteers, so should be able to choose who they wish to help.
I understand that poster supports a given company so not sure the intent. I am happy that there are so many folks here trying to help!

 

[ThisVNchick]

BeenBurned, agree.

I want to repeat that, if someone's posts bother anyone, use the ignore feature. It is quite helpful for the most part. Except, when the post is quoted. lol
I do believe the authenticators could use that feature if a poster refuses to follow the protocols set up in a given AT. I would hope it would not be until after a number of issues, but it is there. The authenticators are volunteers, so should be able to choose who they wish to help.
I understand that poster supports a given company so not sure the intent. I am happy that there are so many folks here trying to help!

If I could tweak your advice a bit...

How about an option that allows authenticators to remove an improper post and have an automated message sent to the poster's PM that tells him/her to read the first post of the AT thread more carefully before posting again? If removing is a bit much, is there an option to flag the post and then have the mods look it over before the post is removed and message is sent?

I'm sure lots of authenticators get sick of writing "please read post #1 for correct format" over and over again. If the authenticators can just simply flag an improper post that allows the system to alert the poster of his/her wrong-doings, I think, the busier AT threads would move a lot faster and with less work for the authenticator. Not to mention, if the improper post is removed, the poster can't continue to bump the post until an answer is received.

 

[chicinthecity777]

For someone who came here saying she doesn't use the authenticators on the AT forums and instead advocates for a company whose track record is in the toilet, you have hijacked (many times) a helpful and informative thread that is looking to improve the AT forums for those who DO use them.

I'll only speak for myself when I say that it gets old to repeatedly be told that we shouldn't be here if we don't love authenticating, we should act professional instead of letting adversarial posters frustrate us, ignore those adversarial posters (though some of the posters here seem unable to follow their own advice), walk away if we're burned out and generally offer suggestions on improving our personalities.

I'm not sure why posters who clearly dislike some of the authenticators and don't use our services keep coming back.

Frankly, I'd like to see this thread get back on topic hashing out ways to keep the few authenticators who are still here and make the AT forums work for those members and authenticators who DO use them.

Totally agree!

To me, this is really simple. The authenticators are not here on a paid capacity therefore they actually don't need to be "professional" about it! Because they are not here as a professional, IF, that's a big IF, anybody who thinks authenticators are rude or whatever they don't agree, please take your request to a paid service, where you can demand your "professional" service from. There is no point name-calling or being rude back to the authenticators, because it will not do you any favours after that!

As to someone saying having more posts / being a long standing member shouldn't be treated differently, actually they do! This is a anonymous public forum where members are just as strangers in the street to start with. There is absolutely no other way of knowing someone's character apart from reading their posting history and contribution to the forum. I would totally trust more of a well established member over a newbie! It's just like eBay feedback history. You build your profile and reputation by posting!

 

[deacc]

If I could tweak your advice a bit...

How about an option that allows authenticators to remove an improper post and have an automated message sent to the poster's PM that tells him/her to read the first post of the AT thread more carefully before posting again? If removing is a bit much, is there an option to flag the post and then have the mods look it over before the post is removed and message is sent?

I'm sure lots of authenticators get sick of writing "please read post #1 for correct format" over and over again. If the authenticators can just simply flag an improper post that allows the system to alert the poster of his/her wrong-doings, I think, the busier AT threads would move a lot faster and with less work for the authenticator. Not to mention, if the improper post is removed, the poster can't continue to bump the post until an answer is received.

I have been suggesting this for awhile, excepting in my suggestion, flagging can be done by anyone but reasoning must be provided. I think it is efficient because currently some of us at ATLV sometimes "try to help out" and indicate to the poster's they need to read post #1. Some of helpers (not me in general) will even let the poster know what is wrong. (I don't in general because there are other useful information in page 1 and I think anyone asking for FREE help should at least go and read post 1.) There are several problems with our attempt:
Many posters don't come back or respond and their incorrect post is still there. Even if they do respond, they do so in a new post so the incorrect post again is still there. Very seldomly do I actually see someone respond and then go edit their original post. So by the time authenticators go the thread and continues the authentication, most of the time, the incorrect post is still there. They can't possibly know that someone has already quoted and alert that poster.

I want to add why I think anyone can flag incorrect post. Take ATLV for example, if the post is not in the correct format, especially with no sale link, an authenticator can skip that quickly but if a post has a sale link but that link only provides 2 pictures or blurry pictures then the authenticator obviously can't authenticate base on them and he/she has just wasted time clicking on the link and looking. If the community can collective help out to weed those out for the authenticators, it won't be that much work at all.

 

[missbanff]

If I could tweak your advice a bit...

How about an option that allows authenticators to remove an improper post and have an automated message sent to the poster's PM that tells him/her to read the first post of the AT thread more carefully before posting again? If removing is a bit much, is there an option to flag the post and then have the mods look it over before the post is removed and message is sent?

I'm sure lots of authenticators get sick of writing "please read post #1 for correct format" over and over again. If the authenticators can just simply flag an improper post that allows the system to alert the poster of his/her wrong-doings, I think, the busier AT threads would move a lot faster and with less work for the authenticator. Not to mention, if the improper post is removed, the poster can't continue to bump the post until an answer is received.

I really like that idea.

The only thing to consider is that not every AT has active mods, meaning like those who check in every day or every other day. Some AT's really don't have mods at all (I think there are a couple that have a mod assigned to them by default, but not a mod who authenticates, if that makes sense), only long time authenticators.

 

[JustAgUrL]

This is an example of what I'd mentioned before:

Calling someone out for their opinion and justifying it by saying they don't have as many posts as the long-time member they are criticizing.

Is the person being rude, or is the person not showing enough deference to the long-time member?

If you feel a person is being rude, then they are being rude. It doesn't matter how many posts they do or don't have, and I don't think that should not be a factor in an assessment.

If you notice I also said: Now, EVERYBODY has a place here.... Somebody with ONE post, somebody with 10,000 Posts... BUT... to say something like that to
a LONG TIME Member, who spends most of her time on The Purse Forum, HELPING people, is just WAYYYY out of line.


So, I also made the point that it really doesn't matter about post count,
BUT... I do think it is uncalled for to sign up and start going after long time members here, who spend their FREE time helping people. That I do find very distasteful.