[b]Hello SW members! :) Thank you for the feedback thus far regarding our new [u]User Verification feature[/u], and thank you also to those who have tried out this feature![/b]
We understand completely why some users may not feel completely happy with this feature, specifically [b]those who prefer not to have a public image of themselves on SW, yet would like to have the "Verified" icon appearing next to their username[/b].
This feature [i](the ☑ badge)[/i] was originally/mostly intended mostly to combat the ever growing issue of users being tricked and "catfished" on SW, by those claiming to be someone who they are not (sharing fake/stolen photos).
Those who post (or share privately) images of themselves (or images claiming to be them) can use this feature to help verify that they are indeed the person in those images.
This portion of our verification feature [i](the badge)[/i] was intended for users who are more public about themselves (photos), and not really aimed at those who enjoy using SW anonymously.
(The other half of this feature, the initial verification photo, is mainly for security/account recovery purposes).
We do understand that it still can seem unfair to many other loyal users, as they too cannot have such a badge without being public about their appearance.
[sep]
The SW Staff has not yet come to a conclusion regarding if and how we can improve this issue, however, we would like to put forward a potential idea.
[b][u]Would you prefer if SW offered different modes of the Verification Status (Badge)?[/u][/b]
[b]• [u]Publicly Verified[/u][/b] - Verification Photo visible to all SW Members
[b]• [u]Visible to other Verified Users[/u][/b] - Verification Photo only visible to other users who have also verified up to this level.
[b]• [u]Visible to SW Staff Only[/u][/b] - Verification Photo only visible to SW Staff.
[c=#BF0000][b]Please note that with each decreasing level, users will have less ability to verify whether or not a user is the person being claimed in their shared images.[/b][/c]
[i]For example:[/i] [quote]You, a SW member, may be chatting with another user who has the Verified Grey Badge [i](Visible to SW Staff Only)[/i].
We the SW Staff will not be able to always monitor whether or not this user is sharing true images of themselves (nor do we monitor what users share privately), after having already been verified. Neither would you or the rest of SW members have access to their "Staff Only" verification photo, to be able to cross-check their identity.
In this case, members would need to use more discretion when it comes to trusting who the user claims to be in their shared photos (since you are unable to see the already approved verification photos).
This is a concern to us, especially for new users who may join the site, and could be misled regarding the authenticity of certain other SW users.[/quote]
[b]We would like to hear your thoughts and feedback!
What do you think about this idea regarding the various Verification Badge modes?[/b]
Do you fully understand how and why the other more private modes of the verification photo (while having a badge) can be potentially used to mislead members?
Please share your opinions, suggestions, thoughts on this new Verification feature and how we may be able to improve it.
Thank you, [i][c=#005E2F]-The SW Team[/c][/i]
[sep]
[c=#004A59][big]Updates:[/big][/c]
[u]Regarding the option of having [b]"Friends Only see your Verification Photo"[/b].[/u]
This defeats a lot of the purpose of this verification feature, and is about equivalent of using the "Staff Only" option, while posting the image also to your "Friends Only" album.
The issue with this idea is that someone can easily have:
[b]• 0 Friends. • All Friends are alternate accounts of their own.[/b]
It is not a useful way of adding trust to someone's verification.
The reason why we opt to have other Verified users be able to see the photo (as the 2nd option), is that there is more validity in this method, as other users who are not directly connected to you, and are verified/trusted themselves, can also verify your own photo identity for the rest of the site.
[sep]
[b][u]Regarding Not having other options of Account Recovery or Verification[/u][/b]
We [b][u]will[/u][/b] be looking into having other options for recovering your SW account in case of loss, such as: [b]Recovery Questions, Secondary Email Address, Phone Number[/b], etc...
Please keep in mind that we cannot develop everything at once. :)
Now that we have more feedback and new concerns from users, we can address such issues.
[c=#800000][Note: This was never a major concern to users before we released this new photo verification feature today, so we are a bit surprised that some are very upset for us not yet having other recovery options][/c] :)
Visible to staff would be nice, I'd even trust "visible to friends/circle only" as well. I'd be willing to share much more with only those I call friends here.
Agreeded. I think I'd trust visible to friends and someone with no friends over nothing. At least an admin looks at something.
SW-User
I think that these options have put users at risk. There are people here who simply cannot show their faces to everyone because of stalkers, their religion, or other reasons. I think they will be treated differently.... with suspicion for not verifying. I've already heard many say, "if you've got nothing to hide, it's not a big deal" But what needs to remain hidden isn't always something that makes a person untrustworthy. I know because it's my personal experience.
Having our photos, even in your "private" database is a risk because of hackers and the like. On top of that, the public photos are at risk of being stolen, misused, etc... even by other verified members.
I think it's important for each person to be in control of the specific people who have access to their photos. Since this site's premise is focused on anonymity, it just boggles my mind that a system like this was even considered.
With all that being said, I appreciate that you guys are attempting to fix a problem and I realize the intent was good. I appreciate the work you all do. I just think that this one missed the mark.
@beckyromero That is a scary thought, and yes, I can see things heading in that direction. But I'm not going to make it any easier for them than it has to be. If they want my private information (my location, my search history, and my emails), I want them to at least have to work to get it.
See: [b][big]China's Dystopian Tech Could Be Contagious[/big] The PRC’s “social credit” scheme might have consequences for life in cities everywhere.[/b]
[quote]Known by the anodyne name “social credit,” this system is designed to reach into every corner of existence both online and off. It monitors each individual’s consumer behavior, conduct on social networks, and real-world infractions like speeding tickets or quarrels with neighbors. Then it integrates them into a single, algorithmically determined “sincerity” score. Every Chinese citizen receives a literal, numeric index of their trustworthiness and virtue, and this index unlocks, well, everything. In principle, anyway, this one number will determine the opportunities citizens are offered, the freedoms they enjoy, and the privileges they are granted.[/quote]
@beckyromero Wow, that's really scary, but unfortunately it does look like a possibility. Thanks for sharing that with me. It reminds me of the TV show [i]Person of Interest[/i], only in this scenario, the machine would be used to control people, not to keep them safe.
SW is trying to sell photo verification as a way to recover one's account.
I have to say that is all disingenuous at best. In the event one did loose their email and password and needed to go this route, I take it that supplying SW with a copy of the photo will suffice.
In that case, why can't [b]ANY[/b] photo submitted to SW as a 'recovery' photo suffice?
A photo of their pet? A photo of their car? A photo of Neil Armstrong planting the U.S. flag on the moon?
Geez Louise!
You are all no doubt math whizzes. So tell us. What are the odds that someone trying to 'recover' someone else's account is going to know what photo or image the initial SW user selected to use as their recovery photo?
This is [b]NOT[/b] about account recovery.
This [b]IS[/b] about creating two tiers of users for everyone to see: verified or not verified.
@beckyromero A copy of the photo won't suffice. If you lose email and password, we will ask you to take [u][b]a new photo[/b][/u] of yourself with a new paper, to prove you are the owner of the account.
@Nuno [quote]If you lose email and password, we will ask you to take a new photo of yourself with a new paper, to prove you are the owner of the account.[/quote]
Thanks for clarifying.
[b]I know you guys mean well.[/b]
And I'm sure most of us have lost passwords before.
But there are ways to "prove" who an account holder is without coming up with something that looks like DAPRA designed it. Many sites have 'secret questions.'
And like you or Andrew said, you are considering other verification methods. And I've now put out the suggestion about using a basic image verification method.
It is worth noting, too, that even if a user has a verified account it does not indicate a level of cordiality which is very often one of the significant foundation stones of trust. A verified user is still capable of demonstrating the same egregious qualities which cause other users to be disconcerted; some, choosing to leave SW as a final resort. Hatred, envy, viciousness, spite, racism, colour-prejudice, etc., has, throughout history assumed the guise of many symbols and banners, each proclaiming a self-importance or righteous indignation. If we are to establish a true 'trust', it must be done through the words we use and the emotions that we display. The true catfishes are those who betray their own pretentiousness, their own concealed intent, disguised under the banner of friendship and compassion. Whether we be female or male, let us not mar those two qualities with malice. 'Honi soit qui mal y pense' - whether verified or not.
Our words are those which will either support the architecture of society or erode it. We cannot cover ruins with fine tapestries and expect the threads by which they are woven to remain in tact; they will but only fray and unravel and trip up all those who are artful weavers in silk. If you wish to be verified, then verify yourselves with dignity, with a nobleness,with good-manners and long-forgotten, social graces with words not ripped from a frantic media and regurgitated like the cud of the bovine beast. 'Manners maketh mankind', not the screeching of barn owls.
let's use some logic. most people are here anon, if we all wanted to be verified we would just use facebook.
there's an issue with catfishes. implementing photo verification doesn't solve the catfish problem AND creates many other problems.
account recover by photo is meaningless as there's many other options that can be implemented that don't require any photo whatsoever.
trying to patch after hours of being rolled out is a sign that things are not going well. all over sw people are complaining. people are losing trust on sw and are concerned about their privacy.
privacy and trust are much bigger values and concerns than trying to fix a catfish problem.
@unknownpoetx [quote]let's use some logic. most people are here anon, if we all wanted to be verified we would just use facebook.[/quote]
Exactly. I hardly use Facebook anymore, especially after all their security problems.
SW-User
The verification thing is great. And it’s obviously understood that it’s meant to those users who POST (not shouting here) pictures of themselves, fake or not...Not to users who have a flower as pfp or whatever. People should not feel offended with this at all, because it’s pointless. Maybe to help them feel less offended change verified account to verified photo or something. Like something saying “ this user uses real pictures of himself/herself. Etc Even though I think the point is very clear.
@SW-User I'm friends with someone on here who wanted to verify she's really female without compromising her anonymity or providing public pictures that can be stolen. This doesn't address that.
And besides for that you can already verify your pictures are really yours through your albums so this is nothing new but makes it more formal which will introduce cliques as well as distrust of those that refuse to verify.
SW-User
@MeisterAndrew How would she verify that she’s a female user without a picture? And the verification firstly was all anonymously, only the adms would see it. So she can do I guess, or else there’s no other way to do it.
I would like to make the point here that one doesn't necessarily have to be a catfish to be a fake. I think it's good that SW admin is trying to do something about the catfishing problem, but I agree that some people will find ways around it, and there are some who are not catfish, but who deceive and hurt people every bit as much as catfish, despite the factual information (age, gender, and national origin) all being truthful. I suppose the admin of this site probably don't have the resources to effectively deal with that problem, and some may say that if you just use common sense, the players of this site (whom I am referring to here) should be easy enough to spot. But not always. Some are very good at deception and manipulation. Some have it down to a science.
So I see this as merely an attempt to treat one of many symptoms of a much bigger, deeper problem. Some people seem to see online interactions as just a game, and they seem to forget that there is a real person, with real feelings, on the other side of the screen.
As for me, I think everyone here knows that I'm for real, and I'm not comfortable showing my face on the internet (except for a few trusted friends whom I've sent pictures to). So I don't think I'll be doing the verification thing, unless someone accuses me of being a catfish. And I don't see that happening, at least not in the foreseeable future.
People can always request someone send them a picture similar to what you are requesting to verify on an individual case by case situation. I'd just warn people and suggest they do that among themselves instead of opening up tons of real pictures for people to steal and post as fake profiles on other websites.
@Earthwrap Do you have any idea how many pictures like the ones people are having in their verified box are being used to make fake profiles on sites like okcupid? At least watermark the heck out of the pictures being verified.
@Earthwrap If you do keep this crazy feature I just ask that you please watermark watermark watermark to prevent further fake profiles on the internet.
There is a reasonable point that you're going to want to update your policy with regards to the photos. I've seen at least a few people in borderline breakdowns about the idea of personal photos being featured on a social network site (yeah I know) - but they should be explicitly cvovered under your privacy policy.
Why not just make real pics for Avis not acceptable,you can still have albums? No real pics... no reason to verify and be a less trusted member(way worded on profile page) for not doing so? I guess you could verify on the albums? And it would cut down the nakies? Which still seem to be rampant while others get warnings for far less offensive pics? Like sissy****b***om with thier porographic pics who never seems to get suspended,ever ?
SW-User
@SW-User *crickets*
SW-User
friends and SW staff is fine with me. I just don't want to be coerced into posting a photo of myself to any stranger on SW. Especially ones I have blocked with multiple profiles.
@SW-User yea not to me either when I first found out about it but in a way I get it but then what about anominity and I know they took that into consideration that it’s mainley aimed at those users who are more freely open with thier pics of themselves and that’s fine but I’m like you I don’t want my pic posted up for all to see like some sort of wanted poster
What's up with being able to "vote on multiple answers"? There is only one vote option against, and two options to vote in favor. To me it would seem to throw off a true indication of how people feel if the same person votes for both the in favor type options.
[b][u]Regarding Not having other options of Account Recovery or Verification[/u][/b]
We [b][u]will[/u][/b] be looking into having other options for recovering your SW account in case of loss, such as: [b]Recovery Questions, Secondary Email Address, Phone Number[/b], etc...
Please keep in mind that we cannot develop everything at once. :)
Now that we have more feedback and new concerns from users, we can address such issues.
[c=#800000][Note: This was never a major concern to users before we released this new photo verification feature today, so we are a bit surprised that some are very upset for us not yet having other recovery options][/c] :)
@OfflineFriend 2FA is an additional authentication. Instead of having email+password you now need email+password+2FA to get access.
So previously you could lose access by losing email+password but now you can lose access by losing email+password or losing 2FA, because you can't reset email+password with 2FA and you can't reset 2FA with email+password.
That only makes the problem worse because they don't even have a way to reset email+password but now they also need one to reset 2FA in case you lose access to that.
SW, a site where you're meant to be able to be anonymous, is now punishing people for making that choice. Yes, it is still a choice, but you're making it unnecessarily disadvantageous to not be verified.
Also. Making some people more trusted, is entirely equivalent to making others less trusted. This. Is. A. Bad. Idea.
@AcidBurn as I said, they really are all valid points. And I’m in the US so my understanding of GDPR is limited to what affects my job. But still, these are not points created by this new update
@summersong I hear ya. Like I said, she mentioned canadian law, so it popped in my head. It's probable there are no issues at all, but this update could bring them to light if there are any. Especially since this site will be holding pictures of minors that want to be verified.
@summersong They haven't addressed it by allowing opting out. GDPR requires that the images which are stored be secure so they can't be accessed without authorisation. They should also be securely deleted when a user deletes them.
I think people are way overacting because of this. It's not difficult to [i]just NOT do it[/i] if you don't like it. There are more important information than a face and I see members giving it so easily in pubic posts. As to this creating an elite system, the same could've been argued about VIPs. This just proves that just about anything can create drama.
@Miram I'm not ignoring any points. You are ignoring the problems. The admins are the ones that made it about trust. Stop acting like it was us. Yes gender is a completely different issue as I keep telling you which is why this won't work.
If you want to continue supporting this abomination with blinkers on ignoring everything that everyone said till it blows up then be my guest.
@Miram It's useless because you don't understand the argument. They blew it out of proportion when they suggested trust. They are out of touch with what the real issues are.
See how they are now backtracking that it's only for account recovery and to "verify" your photos are really yours? Not considering that it's not the way to solve those issues and it doesn't really solve the latter, it's far from the original intent.
Here's a compromise. If it's for photo verification then it doesn't really belong in the profile as it indicates the profile is verified which it isn't. It should be a separate inconspicuous image in your album then indicating it was "verified" as you by an admit. That accommodates both sides without creating trust issues and there's no need for any of these badges.
[u]Regarding the option of having [b]"Friends Only see your Verification Photo"[/b].[/u]
This defeats a lot of the purpose of this verification feature, and is about equivalent of using the "Staff Only" option, while posting the image also to your "Friends Only" album.
The issue with this idea is that someone can easily have:
[b]• 0 Friends. • All Friends are alternate accounts of their own.[/b]
It is not a useful way of adding trust to someone's verification.
The reason why we opt to have other Verified users be able to see the photo (as the 2nd option), is that there is more validity in this method, as other users who are not directly connected to you, and are verified/trusted themselves, can also verify your own photo identity for the rest of the site.
@MeisterAndrew [quote]The only thing some were asking for is a system to verify they are really male or female, mostly females, without publicly showing their identity. [/quote]
Step one is the photo thing.
Step two will probably be asking for verification of age since photos could be from anytime in one's lifetime.
What about people who say they're from a given country.
Please see the latest updates regarding this feature over at our new post: https://similarworlds.com/100-Admin-Announcements/2100587-SW-Verification-Badge-Confirmed-Updates-Hello-to
SW-User
Here's my problem with the whole situation.
What if the site gets hacked? You can't guarantee it won't. I've been stalked in real life twice.
It scares me to know someone on this site might recognize me and walk up to me while I'm shopping. I like the anonymity these Q&A sites provide me. Online, I've had problems with some people following me around. At the moment, they don't know where I live or what I look like. THAT is purposeful on my part. It's for my own protection and peace of mind. It's my choice. I don't care that others might be bothered by it. That choice shouldn't be taken away from me. I shouldn't be required to make other people feel warm, fuzzy, and secure around me. And, keep in mind, just because we see someone's photo, doesn't mean a person can't catfish anymore. If someone wants to catfish another person, they will find a way to do it no matter what "safety" precautions are put into motion here.
With this new requirement, if I don't post my selfie, as time progresses, you can't guarantee I won't be persecuted by those people who feel simply because I choose not to show my face, I must be catfishing someone. By creating this kind of verification process, you are guaranteeing a huge division between people who are now friendly toward those of us who choose not to participate in the selfie revolution that seems to be rampant on this site.
Why can't you just verify with a phone number like the majority of sites out there? It will cut down on the numbers of accounts people use and, if the site gets hacked, we can always block a number from an unknown caller. With this current set up, we can't protect ourselves from someone who becomes obsessed with us. If your concern really is about catfishing, if someone does catfish others here, you'll have their phone number to give out to police if the person does something illegal. Its easier to track a person down with that, than their photo.
@MeisterAndrew True. But don't you wonder why they picked the most inefficient method as the one to implement first? It wasn't an alternate email or security questions. It was "send us a picture, we'll physically take the time to look at it, store it (hopefully securely), and if something happens we'll have you send another picture, take the time to have someone compare the two, and give you your account back."
Problem could be solved simply if SW had a second email account to verify if first one is lost.
They obviously know this.
So why the photo thing?
SW-User
I just wanted to say that I appreciate what you guys do. You go through a lot to make sure that everyone is as happy as possible, even if you can't please every single member, you still allow people to voice what they think and try to work with that.A lot of other sites wouldn't go as far for the members.
The people who make the site work and make sure everything is going well also tend to get people who might behave negatively or dislike them for whatever reason.To me that would be hard to deal with, frustrating even.
Many other places tend to implement what they want and might not focus on the feedback they get as much.
Regardless of how everything turns out, I know you guys try to do your best. Feedback wouldn't be needed if you didn't care about the members or what they thought. So thanks. :)
@SW-User so very true the SW team does work hard to satisfy thier users and they do respect and listen to all the feedback as possible I agree with that totally. GOOD JOB SW TEAM keep it up
SW-User
@Highonheels I feel bad for them everytime an update happens since people can be so mean to them if they're unhappy😅
[quote][Note: This was never a major concern to users before we released this new photo verification feature today, so we are a bit surprised that some are very upset for us not yet having other recovery options][/quote]
What if the issue doesn't lie so much with the fact that you don't have other recovery options - but more with the fact that even your "verification process" suggests that account recovery may only be available for those who have gone through the "verification process"???
The whole thing was a brain fart from the start and needs scrapped now if you still want to be a place that we can turn to for support. If I wanted my mugshot attached to my profile, I can easily do that under my profile, without help from admin - and I certainly don't need a [big]huge[/big] picture on my profile to help me to do it either... my body image issues are bad enough as it is without you making it any worse for me.
Fortunately, I haven't really been here for long and I've achieved what I set out to do, so it's not really that hard for me to bow out now and go set up camp elsewhere - which is precisely what we are in the process of doing anyway.
You do know that, if you'd lifted the limits on images, the catfish and fakes problem would have sorted itself out since we are more than capable of comparing pictures to see if people look remotely alike and those that like to share pictures of themselves would be able to share more pictures to remove any shadow of doubt, right???
SW-User
@HootyTheNightOwl Maybe not being able to recover your account is nothing new though. Before you needed access to your email account to do so and you were in bad luck if you lost that. Now there is one more option and if you are uncomfortable with that, you can still rely on just email.
[quote][Note: This was never a major concern to users before we released this new photo verification feature today, so we are a bit surprised that some are very upset for us not yet having other recovery options] [/quote]
You mean it hadn't been mentioned until today? The news is still filtering through so not everyone is up to speed.. But that aside, the 'alternatives' to account verification would come before a photo mandatory 'option'.
You still haven't given any reasonable or valid reason why you're putting this out in the first place. Anti catfishing and member verification are not good reasons and as I said earlier easily circumvented. So what ARE the reasons for having members' mug shots (that might not be their own) on your data base and this site?
@HerKing I knew a lot of the AOL mods and used to eat lunch with them when I was traveling for my job. They were amazingly caring and they took their jobs seriously. I think the admins and mods here really do care, and I don't think they will be able to please everyone. I had never thought about it from the perspective Elandra brought out. I did know some of her history because I have known her since EP but I also know she is generally a very private person so for her to comment in the way she did made my heart go out to get and others even more. I can see why she wouldn't want to be singled out because she isn't verified but at the same time has been very honest about who she is with friends and acquaintances here (with me personally) Why would her not having a check next to her name impact me. I dont think it would because I have known her since probably the early.2000's but that doesn't mean everyone would and for that reason, it does concern me.
@HerKing [quote]But what you CAN do is give more options for reporting disturbing/borderline criminal/overtly criminal postings. [/quote]
I agree, I have seen so many users here that should be booted off of SW not because they they hurt my feelings or that they said something I didn't agree with, those type of people I can block and move one, but the users who spread fake information and who are abusive or suspicious behavior don't get flagged.
I was a little disappointed when half of my reports where rejected because the admins thoughts I reported them out of spite but they were for good reasons and this made my anxiety act up and I also tend to over think and I thought that they would ban me if I kept reporting people so I actually used to hesitate or not report awful users at all. This is the main reason why people leave the site.
Badly thought out and frankly pretty insensitive of you trotting it out before doing what you've done here.. I know from experience (and learning the hard way) that leading people after they're aware of all options and can make an informed choice is far and away more productive than saying "This is what we're doing, take it or leave it". Sure, it's your website and you're free to do what you wish with it. But if you're then trying to tell us it's for account recovery, I'm afraid that is mendacious at best. I have several accounts on a few website forums and e mail providers. NOT ONE requires a photo ID for account recovery. And the equally spurious reason that people can identify who they're talking to is again frankly rubbish.
I'm no expert by any means with PS, but I can cobble together a photo of someone and make it fit the requirements to be in the cool kids club.
If someone sees my photo on here and they don't believe it it's me, then that's their problem, not mine.
One thing that has happened is this. There are people where I never knew what they looked like (perhaps they had shared it somewhere, but I never saw it). They have no public photo albums. Yet now I know what they look like. Did they really want to share this so easily? Did they know this would happen?
So rather than use this tool to spot catfish, I am now, I confess, using it to see what people look like. I am not sure this was the intent. But it is voluntary.
I will not be participating. People will have to trust me for what I write.
I would like to see an option to verify to staff, gain the icon but still be able to remain anonymous to other users (not have my face displayed all over my profile)
@Chickie Yeah......and I could see this making it worse .
SW-User
I think even in case that verification idea cannot be tricked with photo editors, it doesn't verify the account. It only verify the picture.
So, why not making it a photo verification system not account verification. So that the "verified" icon is showed near the photo whenever it's used. Yet, all accounts are displayed the same to avoid discrimination as if verified accounts are more trustworthy.
@SW-User it'd have been fine to make that distinction, not based on the picture alone. It is trivial because most people aren't complaining about the division nor care to close that gap by contributing less in the drama. They are complaining about other things. The post opened a door and not many are closing it.
I honestly don't see the use of it. Verification was supposed to be for one thing only, to verify that someone is really male or female. You don't need to make anything public for that. Verification isn't going to solve the other problems of people really being who they claim they are and not being lied to.
@TheSacredOne Nobody isn't saying that people who chose not to verify are fakes the users who don't want to verify usually have good reasons. The admins just used a poor choice of words that's all.
@Chickie I haven't seen anyone jumping to conclusions, yet, about those who choose not to verify. Hopefully that won't happen. I'm sure my friends, including those who have chosen to verify, will understand why I haven't.
@dumpstermeow But I think the whole point of verification is to let others know that you are verified which is what the checkmark basically is for. If you don't want that, then just don't verify.
@dumpstermeow, we will be releasing many new changes soon, which should help accommodate most user's requests thus far regarding this verification feature.
You will soon have more control over when and where your Verification Badge is shown on SW.
Please see the latest updates over at this post: https://similarworlds.com/100-Admin-Announcements/2100587-SW-Verification-Badge-Confirmed-Updates-Hello-to
I shall ask this of the administration: how do we know that those who claim to be genuine have not, in fact, asked a friend to provide his or her own photo to the administration? Quite simply, we do not. Therefore, another issue of trust arises: have they provided their [b]own [/b]genuine photograph? We cannot tell. Rather than the doubt being removed, the suspicion just increases and we are left with the same [i]credo [/i] "I am telling the truth".
Hey Andrew I personally enjoy the anominity of the site I don’t like to show my face in my pics for privacy reasons and I think that asking for a pic is a sort of direct attack on our right to have our privacy , I know there are other options available for verification and I understand SW’s reason for the verification process but can’t you just make both the pics private and let other users know that they’ve been verified using the same badge system , I don’t know I mean will there be some sort of benefit for verification and or some sort penalty for not verifying or something. I know you want to put a stop to the cat fishing and trolling stuff and I respect that but please allow me my right to privacy , I hide my face for a reason and the way I see it having my face posted out ther like that for all to see makes it seem like a wanted poster or something and kind of defeats the purpose of privacy, like I said I get why you want to do it and I actually started the process with the first pic since it would be kept private which I’m fine with but when I found out the other pic would be made public I decided not to continue the process , sorry I just don’t want my face out there for all to see , I don’t like feeling like I have something to hide but we do should also have a right to have our privacy in whatever way we choose.
@Highonheels [quote]defeats the purpose of privacy[/quote]
[quote]I don’t like feeling like I have something to hide but we do should also have a right to have our privacy in whatever way we choose.[/quote]
I agree and that's the reason why I took the verification mark off it's not worth it to expose your privacy and not only that but a lot of people are very mean spirited when it comes to having a different mind set or opinion and with your picture up for display like that on your profile users could probably use it against you or black mail you, then there's the thing about people stalking you or your employer tracking down the social media accounts you're on. I don't have nothing to really hide but I don't want to be put out there.
@Andrew ok then that sounds good I guess but I have another question let’s say you do the process and set the pic as private or SW staff only and a user questions the validity of that badge what will happen then
@Chickie thank you for agreeing with me , yea if my pic gets out there , there are people that can and will use it to find other accounts like FB , Twitter etc... I completely agree with that you hit it right on the head
SW-User
i have trouble understanding the level of butthurt over this feature lol
So, just to be clear, the Admins and mods don't need to have a picture up to have the verification icon? Remind me again, the point of that verification icon? And if you're brave, admins, try to justify this bullshit.
Really the whole point of a verification system is that it should always be private. If people want to show they are real they can do that in private like they've always been doing up till now. There is no need for this system and different badges like they are proposing just continues to show they are missing the mark like @TeresaRudolph71 stated. While the real issue isn't being addressed I quite frankly don't actually feel welcome here any more.
@Nuno I know how much you care! Believe me, I do. One would be hard pressed to find another, on a any social media site, that cared as much, in an admin role, as you do with SW. I can say that until I am blue in the face and some will never believe me- and that is fine.
I am sure some are unhappy-a lot have ended their accounts. Something you would know much better than I. But this HAS causes distention and divisiveness among SW members- at times pitting one belief against another. No matter the level of caring there is.
Look, I am 61, a transwoman and a translesbian. When I was legally male I had body image issues- I never saw myself as anyone special. I was not ugly but I was not handsome. I had a family. Now I am alone as they are grown.
Now I am legally female and those body images issues I had, when male, are multiplied TIMES TEN! And while I get told a lot I am pretty(and that I look young and NOT 61) I do not see myself that way. I'm still no one special.
So the last thing I wish to do is put up a pic of myself to prove I am who I am.
And I think that feeling , for whatever reason is resonated with others who wish to remain a static image and not a pic.
Left unchecked, this policy draws a line in the sand, so to speak, of those who are credible;reputable and those who are suspect and may lack credibility.
A member, one who has logged out and not returned-has already called me a fake and a catfish and reported me as such--I've been down that road.
@MeisterAndrew [quote]The correct thing to do would be to just scrap the system and implement what was actually asked for namely gender verification[/quote]
Even photos won't be sufficient for some. So I'd imagine birth certificates will be next. But then there are those "in transition." What will be demanded so some can be satisfied in ruling out those members? Genital proof?
@kingkyri I understand that completely. I did honestly feel a bit "Odd" having that mark next to my name when the feature was released.
(I can tell you, that I do not feel any extra "Bonus" having that mark added, already being a site admin.)
Hopefully we will have the idea of the different badge options approved, then I can dial down to the "Grey badge" option which would be more appropriate for my current account.
I feel like public verification can be dangerous and risky to some.I dont know who views my profile. I would like to be verified maybe.I do post pics of myself.They're never up for long though out of fear someone can steal it or someone using it to find me.Stalkers. Maybe if I can even select who is allowed to view my verified photos(maybe through permissions to individual users or maybe a selection for just friends to be able to view it)
Or maybe a way we can double verify ourselves without having to go public with it.Or even triple verify if needed.
@SW-User I knows. *hug* You do whatever you need to stay safe. A picture visible only to admins is fair and you don't even have to do that.
SW-User
I'd like that sign to appear only to the ones that visit my profile. Not all the time. I don't think it's too relevant to keep it all the time next our usernames
@SW-User Thanks for the feedback. We are already looking into having this option available. A setting which will allow your "Verification Badge" to appear only on your profile, and not across the entire site. Hopefully this change will be available very soon.
SW-User
I think leave it as it is and respect all choices from sw users.
This option can then be used if wanted and if not then go without.
Inevitably it comes down to trust between friendships too.
On that note 📝 I personally really the ✅ at the mo and had no issue in how to obtain it.
I found it amusing taking a ‘mug shot’ and will prob change my pics from time to time ( sorry I’m a faff) 🙈lol
@SW-User faff about/around. UK informal. — phrasal verb with faff uk /fæf/ us /fæf/ verb. to spend your time doing a lot of things that are not important instead of the thing that you should be doing: I wish you'd stop faffing about and do something useful!
@Andrew I'm sorry this is so tough on you guys. I can see you're trying to make this place the way we all want it to be. And this must be a flipping headache. But - you don't know - if you dint try. And even though I have my doubts.........I still appreciate the effort you guys are putting in. 👍
@Andrew i think if someone is trying to verify fake/photoshopped images then their account sould be marked as fake. (And also the staff should privately file that user's ip address as a fishy users' source of fake profiles) It's one thing to use an image just for visual expression and it's another thing to use images that aren't theirs and to claim it is theirs.. That's the definition of catfishing and fake and what we are all trying to avoid; such type of false users . Ugh
As I said elsewhere, if we use this feature I like the three levels of verification but I think the design shouldn't indicate one is better than another.
I was immediately taken aback when I clicked on the "Verified" tick and was shown the facial picture. Is that a cropped picture without the paper showing user name/date etc? I do not have a facial picture here. If I was to use this feature then it would only be for verification purpose of Admin. Since I never share personal photos of me and do not wish to receive personal photos. I can only be verified by providing the requirements set out.
@unknownpoetx Sure. I will support this site as it has given me pleasure and also an outlet to bring issues I think are important to the wider community. This verification subject is not a major concern.
