tPF authenticator discussion

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
#766
^
It should go without saying that authentication threads require (1) stated rules that posters need to observe in making a request and (2) authenticators to review these posts, by which we mean members who are known at least in this forum for some track record in the brand or medium. This second point by definition rules out a brand-new member who arrives and starts "authenticating."
 
#767
Nikki_ said:
I'm glad that this issue was brought up.

I was going to use the AT jewelry thread a week or two ago ago but decided against doing so, as the member authenticating had only 15 posts. (While this member may/may not know jewelry, I just wasn't comfortable, no offense)
Click to expand...


And all posts were authentication posts on that thread.
Then there is the issue that this person states that he/she is a seller on eBay. :thinkin:
 
#769
Nikki_ said:
Well now, that's a bit of a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

Especially since she doesn't know what she's talking about. I wonder if she's sending her own buyers here for authentication and authenticating her own items (I know, I'm being cynical, but she's so clearly authenticating items that could not be authenticated by anyone based on the pictures shown).
 
#770
charleston-mom said:
Especially since she doesn't know what she's talking about. I wonder if she's sending her own buyers here for authentication and authenticating her own items (I know, I'm being cynical, but she's so clearly authenticating items that could not be authenticated by anyone based on the pictures shown).
Click to expand...



I have been watching the jewelry AT thread for years and I am amazed at what I read. Some people requesting authentiication have many posts (100s - 1000s) but accepts a new member's word for a multi thousand dollar item. I've seen Rolex watches being authenticated and that is almost impossible without seeing the watch in person.
 
#771
I don't use the Jewelry Box AT thread but I will say it is different. There's no consistent authenticators and authenticating numerous brands in one thread has different issues. Trust when I saw we're reviewing it all.
 
#772
Prada Psycho said:
And all posts were authentication posts on that thread.
Then there is the issue that this person states that he/she is a seller on eBay. :thinkin:
Click to expand...

Nikki_ said:
Well now, that's a bit of a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is necessarily a conflict of interest. Two of the three Coach authenticators sell. I'm not going to stop selling so if that is a conflict of interest, then I'll stop authenticating. I'd never authenticate my own listings. If I weren't selling, I wouldn't have had as much access to items that improve my knowledge as an authenticator.

In my mind, it's the same as ebay allowing me to report fakes, even though I'm potentially reporting listings that compete with mine.
 
#773
whateve said:
I don't think it is necessarily a conflict of interest. Two of the three Coach authenticators sell. I'm not going to stop selling so if that is a conflict of interest, then I'll stop authenticating. I'd never authenticate my own listings. If I weren't selling, I wouldn't have had as much access to items that improve my knowledge as an authenticator.

In my mind, it's the same as ebay allowing me to report fakes, even though I'm potentially reporting listings that compete with mine.
Click to expand...
Now this makes sense to me!:smile1:
 
#774
In the jewelry subforum, the AT thread doesn't seem to be like many other AT threads and I can't seem to see if there is a regular trusted authenticator. That just shows how lucky we are to have really well-versed authenticators in our other sections. We are on top of it an want to see how to best handle it!
 
#775
whateve said:
I don't think it is necessarily a conflict of interest. Two of the three Coach authenticators sell. I'm not going to stop selling so if that is a conflict of interest, then I'll stop authenticating. I'd never authenticate my own listings. If I weren't selling, I wouldn't have had as much access to items that improve my knowledge as an authenticator.

In my mind, it's the same as ebay allowing me to report fakes, even though I'm potentially reporting listings that compete with mine.
Click to expand...


I haven't sold on eBay for a while now, but when any of my own Prada listings popped up on the AT threads, I would just pass it by and let the other authenticator address it or she could pass it by as well. That said, obviously I agree with you on your point.

What I see as the "conflict of interest" in the case of the Jewelry AT situation right now is an unknown member, new to the forum, making pronouncements on other seller's items. While it may be on the up and up, there's also the possibility that this person could be intentionally miscalling items in the hopes of eliminating the competition. They could also be saying their own items were authentic when they are in fact counterfeit. We've seen similar angles of this on the Prada AT thread, as I'm sure the other AT folks have: an eBay seller who puts their own items on the AT threads asking or authentication. Either for a little free advertising or to see if their fake bags will pass muster.
 
#776
charleston-mom said:
OMG - I just went over there to see what you were talking about - and yes, this needs to be stopped. Authenticating very expensive jewelry and saying it's real on the basis of 3 small blurry pictures . . . Wow - I kind of think we shouldn't have an authenticate this jewelry section unless it's going to be people that know what they are doing, and that care enough to ask for necessary pictures (and that don't basically say they own the exact same item as they are authenticating - over and over again) - Strains credibility to say the least.
Click to expand...

This happens sometimes on AT Shoes too.
 
#777
It's totally fine for sellers to also help authenticate. I'd bet most of our authenticators sell their items once in a while.
-We don't allow members to post their own auctions for authenticating.
-We don't allow members to authenticate their own items.
-We DO allow members to briefly defend their items posted in AT threads however.


Just like any other rule broken, if a member is caught violating our TOS we handle it :yes:
 
#778
zippie said:
I have been watching the jewelry AT thread for years and I am amazed at what I read. Some people requesting authentiication have many posts (100s - 1000s) but accepts a new member's word for a multi thousand dollar item. I've seen Rolex watches being authenticated and that is almost impossible without seeing the watch in person.
Click to expand...

+1 I agree. I have been going to school for my certification to be a Gemologist but have taken a break these last few months. Fine jewelry & watches cannot be authenticated without a hands on, real life inspection. Certain tests need to be done to determine if stones are genuine & that requires some tools. JMHO
 
#780
zippie said:
Now we have a new authenticator with under 15 posts. I strongly suggest that you take down this jewelry authenticate thread, it is ridiculous on so many levels.
Click to expand...


I'm honestly really really concerned about this. Jewelry is a very high dollar item. Authenticating without documentation is huge. I've asked for more information re qualifications. I don't think selling a few pre-owned Tiffany items on etsy is qualification, especially without pictures needed by any normal authenticator missing. Frankly, I think she should be asked to stop or the thread should be discontinued until this is sorted out.

I'm deeply grateful to Lee, Addy, Prada Psycho, Miss Banff (and ALL our wonderful authenticators, and the list of people who help us is long and treasured and means the world to all of us - who I not only trust implicitly), but I'm also aware of the temptation of unqualified individuals to try to toot their own horns.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top