Quote:
Originally Posted by drc
Per grayghost's much earlier post, I have no pre-conception or opinion of the company.
It is interesting that just days ago people were bashing PSA/DNA and JSA for not guarantee their opinions, yet here is a company that say it will guarantee things and people are complaining about that too.
Let's not just be a board of complainers.
|
I think it's the whole re-submission process for bad authentications that has people concerned/scratching their heads. Seeing a list of their "authorized 3rd party forensic authenticator"(s) would probably go a long way to easing (or confirming) people's concerns. Since I don't see any such list on their website, that may be up in the air until someone has first-hand experience and can relate it here on the board.
To my mind, their whole "guarantee" hinges on that one factor. If they use a reputable 3rd party authenticator for disputed certs and actually follow through on their guarantee, then they darn sure better not make any high-profile mistakes as it would only take 1 bad Ruth settlement to wipe out a whole pile of those $10 authentications. (Which, incidentally, is the kind of hard-line self-imposed regulation/penalty system many have been wishing for from other companies).
If, however, their authorized 3rd party authenticator is Chris M, well, that's a loophole big enough to drive a truckload of bad certs through...