Un-Verified Accounts: What do you think about them? How long should one have to verify it?

I wholeheartedly agree.

At the very least, I think that un-verified accounts should come with limitations. For example, a person with an unverified account should not be able to up or down vote [or, should have a smaller number of up votes (less than verified members have) --- and no down votes --- at their disposal].

Good topic SGT (Join to see) --- thanks!

I would agree. I have seen some accounts that are shady to be honest. First, I also believe that one should use their full name. Just as you and I do. It lends to responsibility of our statements. Using a pen name or just letters seems odd to me. It is really hard to take you serious. A picture is great also. I use my one in uniform. I think it only adds value to what I say. You can see that I am not just a new LT. I have a bit of flair that shows my experience. When the picture is blank it is just old to me too. I have seen some profiles that I was thrown off when I clicked them. I thought they were much younger. It is rare to see anyone retire as a 1LT. A picture would have clarified that.

I way to set a restriction to posting after a certain time frame would be a good idea.

RP is a site that military professionals share our ideas and thoughts. We may not always agree, but we have a common bond and I respect each person on here. We do not need trolls that voice an opinion on something they know nothing about.

SGT (Join to see), outstanding topic for discussion.

For what it's worth, here are my thoughts on the subject.
1) 1 month max. to verify.
2) Verify by Form DD214 for veterans and retired, Active Duty Orders for Service Members, School Records for Cadets and some type of official paperwork for National Guard and Reserve. Military email address that is verified. NO VOUCHING FOR ANYONE.
3) Limited to READ ONLY until verified.
4) Remove if unverified for one month.
5) Rank and full name required.
6) For security purposes, make photo optional to protect identity for Special Operators, for example.

If by these standards one cannot comply, they must have something to hide, like stolen valor.

Outstanding question, SGT (Join to see)! I think 14 days is a sufficient amount of time to get your RP account verified. If you can't get it done in 14 days, you probably don't belong here!

In those rare instances for our older Retirees or Veterans who may be encountering difficulty getting verified, that's when you scroll to the bottom, and click on that little hyperlink that says "support" and let the folks at RP who get paid to assist you do their jobs on your behalf! 14 days, or your locked out until such time as you can verify your eligibility to be here. No exceptions, no excuses.

I also feel GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad has a sound recommendation in regards to voting, only I would recommend making it a tad more restrictive and propose that until you are verified, you don't get to vote on anything, up or down. Nor do you get to start a new thread. You may comment and contribute to an existing or current post or thread, but if you wish to start post a new discussion or vote on anything, get verified first! This way, the integrity of the activity on the boards is protected from trolls and the establishment of fraudulent accounts. The profiles of verified members and their reputations on RP are safeguarded from those who may "drive by" and down vote their posts and comments on various threads.

To the greatest extent possible, we need to regard RP as an exclusive club, or gated community. The pathway to membership is well-established and easy to comply with; it is neither burdensome nor overly challenging. But if you want to enjoy the full benefits of RP, get yourself verified or be content with the limited access you have.

I posted something along the same lines last year. I think RallyPoint has now grown to such a state that being verified is more important. We are seeing more and more trolls enter the forums and the admins can only get to them so quickly. I would agree that a time limit should be put on new accounts to verify their status. It isn't hard. I also think their access to the site should be locked down to just viewing the forum without having the ability to respond until their accounts are verified. If they don't verify within the time window given, their accounts should be flagged and then removed.

SFC Mark Merino LTC Yinon Weiss The perennial topic returns.

Ladies and Gentlemen, there are some similar discussions where similar inquiries have been addressed. Some of them are linked here above and right under "similar discussions" ---> ^

I've suggested before an option on your own profile to "view as" various conditions of other users might help users understand how little unverified members get to see based on your security settings.

Finally, anything you type here in answers is fully searchable to any person on google. Your face will be blurred and your name obscured (probably) but keep that in mind. Nothing on the web is truly private.

I think I found something we completely agree on! I would go a step further and say users need to be verified before doing anything. Fake accounts are a security issue and even a means to poison the community.

I tend to side with CPT (Join to see) as well on names. I've noticed that some of the most aggressive, unpleasant members I've encountered tend to have fake names. I also understand why some desire a little more anonymity, so don't think pictures are necessary.

At first I didn't get on Rally Point very much at all, so I did not even realize that my account needed to be verified, but I also was not sure at first what kind of social media this app would turn out to be. I wasn't sure at first that I wanted to be a part of it. So I definitely took awhile to be verified, but I completely agree that we don't need any further stolen valor types or folks that were never "in".

It was pretty painless for me as an active service member to verify my account. All I had to do was verify it through my "work" military E-Mail. I understand it is the nature of the beast but unverified service members make me suspicious. That means anyone in the world (regardless of actual military service) can get on here and create an account without accountability.

Maybe we can have a "sponsor" option to where verified members can vouch for unverified members that we personally know. This might offer a more enticing option for those reluctant to verify their accounts through the normal channels. Thoughts?

SSG James J. Palmer IV SFC Mark Merino TSgt Joshua Copeland Capt Richard I P.