A Discussion on Knock-Off Reporting Threads

I'm getting a bit bothered by the Knock Off threads that have been appearing as of late. Specifically ones created under the pretense of reporting the existence of them, and which sometimes thus end up appearing as news on the website's front page.
First off, I understand fully the need to report the existence of knock offs. If I'm buying a high-end Transformer, and there is a chance there may be a knock off out there, yeah, I'd kind of like to know.
But I strongly question the way knock offs have been reported here lately.
There's multiple threads floating around lately whose main purpose seems to be mentioning knock offs exist, posting multiple pictures of them showing how good they look, and posting links to where you can buy them. And it really makes me wonder if these threads are truly meant to warn against them rather than to inform about them to less then scrupulous Transformers collectors.
Is there a need for these threads to include galleries of photos illustrative of how identical they are to the original toy? If we know what the original looks like, surely we'd get the idea. I'd suggest photos are only necessary if they specifically highlight differences between the original and the knock off that can be useful in telling them apart and making the knock off easier for legitimate Transformers collectors to avoid.
Also, is there a need for links? It has been suggested that they are necessary as proof of existence. Um... okay. Was there ever a case of such a knock off being reported and the reporter being a big fat liar? If the knock off exists, just say so. I'll believe you.
If it is only a rumor of a knock off, say that too. I'll at least know to be on guard for any "too good to be true" deals. And if rumor becomes fact later, you can just give us an update then. But I don't need links.
One might suggest that links are necessary to know which stores to avoid. Just tell me which stores you've seen them at. Providing a link is unnecessary. My problem is that these threads seem to be becoming advertisements for the knock offs. If someone wants to buy one, I say let 'em at least work a little bit for it by having to type in a web address then search the offending retailer site. And I especially don't think links to eBay auctions are ever necessary in knock off reporting. A knock off exists and it is being sold on eBay. Oh my god, I am so surprised.
The reporter still thinks at least one link is necessary for accountability, afraid of being accused of making it up? I can grudgingly almost see the need for that. But why more than one? And why further updates later in the thread, after you've proven it exists, providing more links to more purchasing options?
At what point does a thread stop being warning and start being advertising?
If it is advertising, I don't like it. But fine, whatever. At least present it as such, and stop pretending you are providing a service to legitimate collectors. And to those who decide what is news worthy of being on the front page, for the love of god stop presenting these threads as news.
If it is news, I'd suggest such threads should be subject to unusual restriction. Have the initial post end with a strong disclaimer against purchasing such things. At most one link to where one can be purchased (for informational purposes only) in the initial post, and no further such links in follow up posts. No photos in the thread unless they are specifically highlighting differences that can be used to tell the knock off from the legitimate product. I'd even suggest locking the threads after the first post, so that they exist as informational tools only and cannot be followed by ten posts of, "Awesome, thanks! I'm totally buying that! Screw Hasbro!" But if discussion is allowed, I'd suggest holding posters in these threads to the same heightened rules regarding images and links.
What do my fellow forum members think? More importantly, what do the mods and other powers that be think? And please, do not post here if all you are going to do is say something that boils down to, "I love knock offs, so everything you just said is dumb." This isn't a discussion about knock offs, but rather how they are reported. If you disagree with me, please do so on that basis and provide a reasoned argument for your disagreement. I'd like to avoid the ever repeated "ko/anti-ko" debate.
I fear I shall not be at my computer much this weekend, but I look forward to seeing what response this might generate and will chime in when I can.
Thank you.
First off, I understand fully the need to report the existence of knock offs. If I'm buying a high-end Transformer, and there is a chance there may be a knock off out there, yeah, I'd kind of like to know.
But I strongly question the way knock offs have been reported here lately.
There's multiple threads floating around lately whose main purpose seems to be mentioning knock offs exist, posting multiple pictures of them showing how good they look, and posting links to where you can buy them. And it really makes me wonder if these threads are truly meant to warn against them rather than to inform about them to less then scrupulous Transformers collectors.
Is there a need for these threads to include galleries of photos illustrative of how identical they are to the original toy? If we know what the original looks like, surely we'd get the idea. I'd suggest photos are only necessary if they specifically highlight differences between the original and the knock off that can be useful in telling them apart and making the knock off easier for legitimate Transformers collectors to avoid.
Also, is there a need for links? It has been suggested that they are necessary as proof of existence. Um... okay. Was there ever a case of such a knock off being reported and the reporter being a big fat liar? If the knock off exists, just say so. I'll believe you.
If it is only a rumor of a knock off, say that too. I'll at least know to be on guard for any "too good to be true" deals. And if rumor becomes fact later, you can just give us an update then. But I don't need links.
One might suggest that links are necessary to know which stores to avoid. Just tell me which stores you've seen them at. Providing a link is unnecessary. My problem is that these threads seem to be becoming advertisements for the knock offs. If someone wants to buy one, I say let 'em at least work a little bit for it by having to type in a web address then search the offending retailer site. And I especially don't think links to eBay auctions are ever necessary in knock off reporting. A knock off exists and it is being sold on eBay. Oh my god, I am so surprised.
The reporter still thinks at least one link is necessary for accountability, afraid of being accused of making it up? I can grudgingly almost see the need for that. But why more than one? And why further updates later in the thread, after you've proven it exists, providing more links to more purchasing options?
At what point does a thread stop being warning and start being advertising?
If it is advertising, I don't like it. But fine, whatever. At least present it as such, and stop pretending you are providing a service to legitimate collectors. And to those who decide what is news worthy of being on the front page, for the love of god stop presenting these threads as news.
If it is news, I'd suggest such threads should be subject to unusual restriction. Have the initial post end with a strong disclaimer against purchasing such things. At most one link to where one can be purchased (for informational purposes only) in the initial post, and no further such links in follow up posts. No photos in the thread unless they are specifically highlighting differences that can be used to tell the knock off from the legitimate product. I'd even suggest locking the threads after the first post, so that they exist as informational tools only and cannot be followed by ten posts of, "Awesome, thanks! I'm totally buying that! Screw Hasbro!" But if discussion is allowed, I'd suggest holding posters in these threads to the same heightened rules regarding images and links.
What do my fellow forum members think? More importantly, what do the mods and other powers that be think? And please, do not post here if all you are going to do is say something that boils down to, "I love knock offs, so everything you just said is dumb." This isn't a discussion about knock offs, but rather how they are reported. If you disagree with me, please do so on that basis and provide a reasoned argument for your disagreement. I'd like to avoid the ever repeated "ko/anti-ko" debate.
I fear I shall not be at my computer much this weekend, but I look forward to seeing what response this might generate and will chime in when I can.
Thank you.