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

When should members have to confirm their identity? And how?

When we launched Autograph Magazine Live, we decided to give members the option of posting anonymously so they could legitimately discuss autographs with less risk of being sued.

For the most part, that's worked quite well. We have protected a lot of collectors and fans, and we've contributed in a meaningful way to the fight against forgeries.

But like a gun can be used to save lives or take lives, there have been occasions where people have used their anonymity to throw out all sorts accusations, recklessly or nefariously. And worst of all, it's not just the 6,900 members of this site that see these accusations. Over 300,000 other people have read AML in the last year who were not members.

So for the sake of parties being discussed and the autograph hobby, we will no longer allow anonymous members to make accusations. And we're also going to put some rules in place, like other communites have, to make AML a little less chaotic.

When do you think member should have to use their real names and confirm their identity? And how should it be done?

Thanks,

Steve Cyrkin
Community Manager

Views: 1051

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 30, 2015 at 4:04pm

you might want to institute a 48 hour waiting period. a lot of these instigators are triggered by someone calling out their forgeries and they sign up and immediately post.   call it a "cooling off period".

Permalink Reply by Mike T on January 30, 2015 at 4:58pm
+1 - and as long as we're on the topic of site improvements, the ability to like comments would be fantastic.
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on January 30, 2015 at 5:28pm

We can hold-off approving members for 48 hours before they post, but sometimes members lay-in-wait, becoming seemingly respectable members of the community before they come out and blast people.

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 30, 2015 at 5:33pm

if anyone makes accusations without being able to substantiate their claims, they should be bounced.

Permalink Reply by Dane on January 30, 2015 at 4:06pm

For what it's worth, members are guests here, as Steve owns the site. If he wants to require you to provide gov't identification, you could always choose to give up your membership here.

Permalink Reply by Scott W. Arnold on January 30, 2015 at 4:10pm

I am rather new to this site but for what it’s worth. I have and will continue to use my real name as I feel what comes from my mouth or my fingers in this case are indeed mine. I stand behind the words I use; I don’t care if I upset someone with what I have to say. I stand behind them none the less. However I believe a person should be held responsible if they yell FIRE in a crowed theater. Whatever happens is the fault of the person yelling fire and they should be held criminally responsible. The last conformation I went through asked I register my cell phone number and the site sent me a text message and I had to type the message into their system before I could post. For what it’s worth.  Scott W. Arnold

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on January 30, 2015 at 8:44pm

You make good points. The platform we're on doesn't give us high level member controls, unfortunately. We need to move to new software, but we have over 110,000 images and tens of thousands of discussions and blog posts, so it's a major project.

Maybe we can make it work with community rules alone...I don't know. But if so, we'll be deleting a lot of posts that don't comply and the bad guys will have a heyday with it.

Permalink Reply by Sam Iam on January 30, 2015 at 8:43pm
I think the way the forum has been moderated thus far has been fine.

If this rule change is stemming from the R&R post then I don't see why it's a problem. I didn't see any accusations flung around and people were only posting things from the depositions.

I hope that this forum remains an open forum and isn't influenced by any company/person etc in the autograph industry. It would be a shame for people to not feel they can ask questions or say things about particular things. - my 2 cents
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on January 31, 2015 at 7:53am

It's not just the RR post. This has been an ongoing concern for years. Like many of you have said, it's mostly a few people who ruin it for the rest, but it's still something we need to deal with.

Permalink Reply by James on January 30, 2015 at 9:54pm
I just want to say that I've really enjoyed being a member of this site. Since I've been a member of this site over the last 10 months or so, I've read, started, and been a part of many very good and enlightening discussions. I think this site is extremely helpful to all of us that are passionate about autographs. And I think without question this venue is a major nemesis to the community of forgers that unfortunately play too big a role in this hobby. Fortunately though, AML helps the innocent autograph collector to become aware of where the would-be forgers are so that they can be avoided.

But I'm sure it's not just the forgers that get bothered at times by this site. I'm also sure that some of the major TPAs get tired of hearing about their mess-ups. You know, I've been critical at times about PSA/DNA or JSA and some mistakes they've made. But I think it's important that we give our opinions so that people realize that you can't just look at the sticker on an item and assume it's okay. Because, just like all individuals, TPAs are only human, and they make mistakes too.

So despite some of my criticisms of PSA/DNA and JSA, overall, I think they both do great work, and they play an extremely important role in the hobby. Honestly, I think without them both, the forgers could almost take over and completely ruin the hobby.

So whatever new rules might be implemented, I think it's important that AML continues to be a thorn in the side of the forgers. But, if at the same time, this site sometimes bothers some of the major legitimate players in the hobby, I think that's okay, if at the end of the day, we can all go home and look at our collections and be rest-assured that our stuff is the real deal. And I think the openess of this site has helped to make us all (forgers excluded) feel better about our own collections in particular, and the hobby in general.
Permalink Reply by Dan Gregory on January 31, 2015 at 2:49am

There will always be a minority that try to ruin it for the majority be it autographs or drinking, just the way it is.

I think the rules work well but clearly some people have and will come here and band all sorts of accusations and claims. My view is if they make a claim they get 24 hours to back it up or the discussion is removed and perhaps 1 of 3 strikes is issued

Permalink Reply by Rock G III on January 31, 2015 at 6:10am

Why not put this rule in effect and when someone posts something you deem punishable they must then provide this information. If they decline then the post gets removed. 

RSS

Blog Posts

Ebay Seller Smpsportscards Sells Forged Counterfeit Willie Mays 1996-97 Topps Autograph Card

Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments

COA CSA Authentic Forged Babe Ruth Cut Autograph Laughable

Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments

Ebay Seller Tsuch67 Sells Forged Mickey Mantle Duke Snider Willie Mays Baseball

Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Groups

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service