We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Should Member's Real Names be Required to Comment on Authenticity?

Should members be required to use their confirmed real names to comment on authenticity or any controversial or possibly defamatory topic? This is something that's been discussed on and off and I think it's time to require it.

For members and the public to be able to determine who's expertise to listen to, I think they need to know who that person is. And when a dealer or his inventory is called out, it's only fair that he knows who is making the accusations.

Net54, a highly respected sports collecting forum, requires it for members who want to contribute to controversial discussions. And while it may limit the number of registered members, the vast majority of people who use community sites only read it—they don't register and contribute—so the site's value to the autograph community will still be high.

In fact, it should be even higher, because everyone knows the person behind the opinion.

Real name membership won't be required for everyone. Just members who contribute to authentication, controversial or possibly defamatory topics on AML.

Your thoughts?

Tags: real member names

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DB on August 9, 2012 at 9:09am

It's only "private" like physician examination information until there is a SLAP and legal suponea is issued. I once thought that validation of just who people are to keep the "hackers" & "hijackers" on the outside looking in would be a good thing. However, it becomes quite another matter as to how to accomplish it..

I don't believe we would have the "wild west shows" we have if we implemented the code of conduct suggestions long overdue and had a few more U.S. Marshalls.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Jackson on August 9, 2012 at 9:15am

subpoenas and warrants, OH MY. lol. you give "the man" too much credit for following the law. Only us peons have to follow that. they started bypassing those a while ago. now they get it first and then the subpoenas is an after the fact to make it stick in court in a lot of cases. end rant.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on August 9, 2012 at 9:38am

There should certainly be more than one moderator. It's too much drama for one man to handle.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 9, 2012 at 10:03am

You're right--I've been meaning to add more moderators.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Thanos on August 15, 2012 at 9:31pm

I find it hard to read and respect fully at the same time someone s view without a name and relation to autographs.
It's like me going in a plumber s forum and start given them grief about something I don't specialise in.
I always wrote my name on every post which then some one
Could search and say oh yea ok fair enough this guy is a graffers etc .

You sometimes get people who join forums that want to make a fight
With people they get a buzz from that , we call them Keyboard warriors they hide behind
The laptop and no one ever knows who they are so they have a license to make chaos.

And then there is the others the people that have been banned for doing forgeries they come
On forums under a made up name and they open an attack on the person that helped to take
Em down seen this too many times .
But when you sign your name and people know your expertise then people listen to you with
Respect and full attention , this is my view on this matter .
Jason Thanos