tPF authenticator discussion

[storeberry]

I think even with a form, some members might even demand an answer as they have filled the form correctly but authenticators have their own rules on who they want to help.

So the authenticators will still need the mods & admin support on this as the "entitlement mentality" will be magnified when the form is done up.

 

[Megs]

The form should help, but it won't fix everything. There will still be issues, still be people demanding, still people not following rules. And that is why authenticators can choose who they'd like to authenticate for and why.

Someone earlier said we should post each time someone isn't following the guidelines - but that would be a LOT of posting. Plus, each authenticator may do things differently.

I think some of the issue is people still treat the AT thread as if the authenticators are on contract of some sort, when they are not. They have all the free will to do as they wish, authenticate when they wish, and help as much or as little for whomever. The rules that are in post 1 are there to help the authenticators have some order but they are not forum mandated rules.

These threads run different from other parts of the forum, but they aren't going to be something we enforce on authenticators to do x, y, z when it comes to the AT thread. All we ask is people are respectful, on both sides. I think lots of people have so many ideas to help, but some of the ideas are actually creating more work for the authenticators - and we want to make it easier and somehow more enjoyable for them!

 

[Baglover1982]

The form should help, but it won't fix everything. There will still be issues, still be people demanding, still people not following rules. And that is why authenticators can choose who they'd like to authenticate for and why.

Someone earlier said we should post each time someone isn't following the guidelines - but that would be a LOT of posting. Plus, each authenticator may do things differently.

I think some of the issue is people still treat the AT thread as if the authenticators are on contract of some sort, when they are not. They have all the free will to do as they wish, authenticate when they wish, and help as much or as little for whomever. The rules that are in post 1 are there to help the authenticators have some order but they are not forum mandated rules.

These threads run different from other parts of the forum, but they aren't going to be something we enforce on authenticators to do x, y, z when it comes to the AT thread. All we ask is people are respectful, on both sides. I think lots of people have so many ideas to help, but some of the ideas are actually creating more work for the authenticators - and we want to make it easier and somehow more enjoyable for them!

I do understand that and those are the rules but if you are been purposely ignored when you have posted correctly, asked nicely and have no issues with that person on the forum I think is unfair. Shouldn't people who stick to the rules be respected too?

 

[Megs]

I do understand that and those are the rules but if you are been purposely ignored when you have posted correctly, asked nicely and have no issues with that person on the forum I think is unfair. Shouldn't people who stick to the rules be respected too?

I understand what you're saying, but no authenticator is mandated to answer anyone. On a forum we all choose who we interact with for whatever reason. I respond to people sometimes to never get a response, and I never know the reason, but that's the choice of each person.

The authenticators are members who have given their time and their craft to help people out. So if one authenticator wants to help someone who has one post and doesn't follow the rules, that's their choice. Just like it's another authenticators choice to only help someone with hundreds of posts following perfect format requests.

 

[Baglover1982]

I understand what you're saying, but no authenticator is mandated to answer anyone. On a forum we all choose who we interact with for whatever reason. I respond to people sometimes to never get a response, and I never know the reason, but that's the choice of each person.

The authenticators are members who have given their time and their craft to help people out. So if one authenticator wants to help someone who has one post and doesn't follow the rules, that's their choice. Just like it's another authenticators choice to only help someone with hundreds of posts following perfect format requests.

I do get that and I always tell them how much I appreciate their time as I can't imagine how difficult it can be when people continue to not follow the correct format also people who are rude and demanding. I just like to think people are fair. Thanks for your response though always good to hear another side to the story

 

[IrisCole]

I do understand that and those are the rules but if you are been purposely ignored when you have posted correctly, asked nicely and have no issues with that person on the forum I think is unfair. Shouldn't people who stick to the rules be respected too?

There are a lot of reasons that authenticators skip posts - for instance, not every authenticator has familiarity with every item that a brand makes - for example, I can do a lot in LV, but not jewelry or some of the styles in the last couple of years where the fakes have gotten really quite good.

Responding to AT posts is incredibly time consuming - it takes maybe an hour to get through just a few pages (for each item you have to open the link [two, if extra photos are added], look over photos, look at the seller's feedback, do a search of posts on tPF, and then reply to the post) - and if you had to add to that responses to posts that you can't even authenticate, it just gets to be too much.

So when you believe and say it's unfair, please keep in mind that authenticators are already taking HOURS out of their own time each day to help people out.

 

[IrisCole]

I want to add too that there are also a lot of people who follow all of the AT rules and are perfectly pleasant. It's unfortunately just the sour folk who stand out amongst those.

 

[Baglover1982]

There are a lot of reasons that authenticators skip posts - for instance, not every authenticator has familiarity with every item that a brand makes - for example, I can do a lot in LV, but not jewelry or some of the styles in the last couple of years where the fakes have gotten really quite good.

Responding to AT posts is incredibly time consuming - it takes maybe an hour to get through just a few pages (for each item you have to open the link [two, if extra photos are added], look over photos, look at the seller's feedback, do a search of posts on tPF, and then reply to the post) - and if you had to add to that responses to posts that you can't even authenticate, it just gets to be too much.

So when you believe and say it's unfair, please keep in mind that authenticators are already taking HOURS out of their own time each day to help people out.

I do totally get that I respect the authenticators take their time to do what they do. It is a shame that people ruin it for others and I hope a solution can be worked out as it's important the authenticators feel like it's worth giving their time for people

 

[devik]

Agreed. The more common thing in my experience is that when people are told what the request guidelines are, they come back with "Oh, just do it for me this one time," and can get rather upset when they are denied.

I am very hopeful that the form will help newcomers understand the guidelines for an authentication request, because even in filling it out, they will be guided as to the needed information. If they choose to skip or ignore portions, at least they will have seen it.

This happens a lot. Sometimes when I "help out" in the AT threads by redirecting users to Post #1 and educating them on why their requests are insufficient or won't be answered, I get the "Thanks but I'll just wait and see what the real authenticators say."

 

[mistikat]

This happens a lot. Sometimes when I "help out" in the AT threads by redirecting users to Post #1 and educating them on why their requests are insufficient or won't be answered, I get the "Thanks but I'll just wait and see what the real authenticators say."

I do want to emphasize that the majority of people who ask are really lovely. And many people who come for an authentication stay and become engaged members. But ... it's life. Not everyone is going to be nice. It's part of what forum life is like, I think.

 

[devik]

I do want to emphasize that the majority of people who ask are really lovely. And many people who come for an authentication stay and become engaged members. But ... it's life. Not everyone is going to be nice. It's part of what forum life is like, I think.

Yes exactly - and that's why I try to be especially welcoming to new people in my responses. tPF is a little bit intimidating at first and I would never want someone to be turned off based on how they're treated in their first posts (and those first posts often come as auth requests). I think that part is important.

 

[littlerock]

My concern, which I think I have posted somewhere in this thread, is how the form works. Would it be seeking a "valid" link in the blank for links? Otherwise someone can just fill in "I don't have a link" in that space and we are back to square one. I know Meg doesn't want to delete post but honestly I still think it is the most efficient way of cleaning things up for authenticators before they log on. Anyway, I probably have repeated my 2 cents one too many times.

Just to play devil's advocate, but right now, it is not a forum wide rule to have an active link. There are authenticators in many brands that allow people to upload their own pictures for authentication. I am not sure if M&V plan to customize the form for each particular brand, but I'm guessing that would be a bit of work, not sure it's even possible. So I am guessing that the form may not require an active link, otherwise that would block form submissions in forums where a link is not required. I am not sure how this will be addressed, just putting it out there.

 

[BeenBurned]

So when you believe and say it's unfair, please keep in mind that authenticators are already taking HOURS out of their own time each day to help people out.

Many authenticators also post in other sections of TPF offering advice, problem solving, digging up histories, teaching rehabbing, etc. That too is a thankless "job" for which they don't get any compensation!

To expect them to do more is unfair.

 

[bababebi]

I think that if opinions of the authenticators are asked for it should be on a level playing field for all, this is a public forum, not a private one. That means a bag should be available for purchase by all members of the public on an equal footing. I do not support "private" authentications on tPF, and in the Hermes authentication thread we do not answer those requests, nor would we plan to do so.

I am actually kind of surprised that given possible legal liability for the owners that they are still willing to continue with the authentication threads at all. There have been threats of lawsuits against tPF and its owners for opinions offered by authenticators in the past and this remains a risk going forward.

I hope anyone who authenticates on this Forum realizes that they are not indemnified by the owners of tPF in any way, and that some personal risk may exist. This is the real world, tPF is a large, highly trafficked, public forum, not a friendly private chat room where opinions can be proffered without fear of consequences. Members who authenticate without deep brand knowledge are just asking for trouble for themselves and for the owners of tPF.

Due to the unclear legal framework under which volunteer authenticators are offering opinions on this forum I personally am not inclined today to authenticate here on tPF without the answer being quite clear to me. Authenticators are right to be cautious, there is no upside in making a guess about an authentication, given the risks. I am sure that most posters who make requests have not considered or appreciate this. And some authenticators may not have considered it either.

I do know that the Authentication threads draw tremendous traffic to the Forum, this is probably one reason why so much latitude in behaviour has been given to posters and requesters. The traffic is valuable to the owners.

The authenticators deserve support and I am glad to read a post by one of the owners stating that this will happen. It is a great shame some tPF authentication experts have stated on this thread that they felt they were not supported and have quit as a result. It could have been avoided with better management and attention.

 

[zippie]

i think that if opinions of the authenticators are asked for it should be on a level playing field for all, this is a public forum, not a private one. That means a bag should be available for purchase by all members of the public on an equal footing. I do not support "private" authentications on tpf, and in the hermes authentication thread we do not answer those requests, nor would we plan to do so.

I am actually kind of surprised that given possible legal liability for the owners that they are still willing to continue with the authentication threads at all. There have been threats of lawsuits against tpf and its owners for opinions offered by authenticators in the past and this remains a risk going forward.

I hope anyone who authenticates on this forum realizes that they are not indemnified by the owners of tpf in any way, and that some personal risk may exist. This is the real world, tpf is a large, highly trafficked, public forum, not a friendly private chat room where opinions can be proffered without fear of consequences. Members who authenticate without deep brand knowledge are just asking for trouble for themselves and for the owners of tpf.

Due to the unclear legal framework under which volunteer authenticators are offering opinions on this forum i personally am less inclined today to authenticate here on tpf without the answer being clear to me. Authenticators are right to be cautious, there is no upside in making a guess about an authentication, given the risks. I am sure that most posters who make requests have not considered or appreciate this. And some authenticators may not have considered it either.

I do know that the authentication threads draw tremendous traffic to the forum, this is probably one reason why so much latitude in behaviour has been given to posters and requesters. The traffic is valuable to the owners.

The authenticators deserve support and i am glad to read a post by one of the owners stating that this will happen. It is a great shame some tpf authentication experts have stated on this thread that they felt they were not supported and have quit as a result. It could have been avoided with better management and attention.

so true!