As with most database tables there are unique id's for each record... so when you have two people with the same first and last name you actually have an unique id # assigned to you. Database systems use these unique id's to identify you in the background then pulls the necessary data to display based on your id not name. In general. This allows for unlimited people with the same names...

Yes I do understand that the admin and the site owner would know the difference.
But all of our names show up as screen names. Does that mean if another Jason Chapman signs up he will be assigned something else or will he be shown with the same name?
Wouldn't it be confusing if you had 3 people posting under John Smith? Or over a couple of years you have a lot of Bob Jones?

So in essence if another person signs up with my same name what would allow us to see which one was posting to a specific topic?

I agree, that's why I wish they would let us pick our own username or use the one we login to the site with...

Its a total security mistake for all of us having the GPAA use our real names in the forums. It makes it very easy for someone to gather additional personal information about us. I know of no other forums that I have ever been a member of that does not allow its members to select their own username.

This will be my last post and I am a new member.

I thought the new forum was an improvement and in some ways it is but using our real names is total nonsense and a serious security issue in my opinion. And by the lack of posts and not many members even logging in, I think maybe they do not like the real name thing as well.
I quit posting when the old forum became so hostile, still not going to post much or at all because of the name usage.
minerdave

Have heard from others on other forums that they will not be on this one anymore.  Lot of knowledge that will be going away and not available here anymore.

All right, I will just say it. What is the problem with using the sign in name? I think most here and most that decided to be not here would prefer a user name setup. Frank...-

Posted By FRANK NOVAK on 09 Jun 2014 09:08 AM
All right, I will just say it. What is the problem with using the sign in name? I think most here and most that decided to be not here would prefer a user name setup. Frank...-

Being new to the GPAA and these forums, I'm probably stretching it by sharing my personal opinion.  But it seems that the administrators of this site are going against the will of the quiet majority on the ID issue for one simple reason...rather than moderate offending content and/or participants of the forum, the use of first and last names is an effort to stymie those who have and would abuse monikers.  Even though I wasn't a participating member of the old forum, it's clear that some discussions got out of hand.  Yet, having been a web developer myself for almost 15 years, I can tell you that discussions getting out of hand is par for the course...and it doesn't take someone with the experience I have to make this point - anyone who has ever been a member of any forum knows this to be the case.  From a business standpoint, when you take on the responsibility of providing an online environment for open communication, the responsibility of maintaining those communications in a professional manner comes along with it.  But is it wise to implement a policy that essentially intimidates open discussion and the willing participation of those upstanding members who have never abused the forums, or new ones like myself?  How stagnant must things become before someone realizes, "Hey, we invested all this time and money updating our website and forums, but participation stats are going backwards...why?"  Did the GPAA redesign this site with any consideration for the privacy of their members?  Is it really so far fetched to use a last initial rather than a last name?  I could go on and on with questions like these, which I believe are quite relevant and valid, yet I'll leave you all with this -  aside from legal use with governmental, financial and medical institutions, I can say unequivocally that the forced public display of both first and last name is anything but standard web practice and shows, I believe, either a lack of understanding or disregard for basic online privacy issues. 

 

I will not reply to this post again.  I will not reply to replies to my comments.  I'm not here to grind gears and raise hackles, simply to speak up and communicate what I know so many others are wanting to say but won't...because of, not so ironically, the very policy it is they oppose.

 

Gold luck out there folks, may your pans find a placer in the halls of mining lore.

When the new site launched, there were a great deal of GPAA staffers out patrolling the boards, looking for something to do. Now that the forums are a few months old, very few seem to be around.... as well as any members. Few, if any, like the new format GPAA has chosen.

Part of having a discussion board is active policing. On the old board, I actively looked around and the most recent post by one of the admins was 2008. (Really????)

Few will post with their given names - GPAA is feeding the radical environmentalist movement by exposing names and hometowns of members to provide "hard targets". Not to mention, if Ipost "I'm going up to such-and-such claim for the weekend, they are exposing me, and announcing that I will not be at my home on these dates - think robbers and thieves don't browse forums? think again - I've personal knowledge of this as the thief that broke into my house in December was a member of one of the same forums I was involved in. I announced a trip in this forum, and this criminal was able to cobble together my address.

I've come to the conclusion that GPAA only cares about the bottom line, not really about their members. GPAA is, after all, a corporation and they are beholden to their investors. The Buzzard would not approve of how things are currently run in Temecula.

Being a member of GPAA for only the past three years, I've seen the corporation slide in just that short time..... Customer service is non-existant, and the HQ simply pushes issues off to the (non profit) chapters, expecting them to provide what they should be.

While there's great excitement around new mining guides and P&S updates, the claims GPAA gives their members really are not good at all. I am an experienced miner, and it took ~ 12 days in different gpaa claims to mine about 1/20th of an ounce in the central motherload on GPAA claims. I've been able to recover double that in a single day on my own claim. What I've recovered from GPAA claims over the past 18 months won't even pay for a membership renewal. Pretty sad, as the claims are worked over and of poor quality to begin with -despite what HQ says.

I expect Temecula to LEAD the GPAA, rather than push responsibilities off on the local chapters. I'm pretty certain the chapter feel the same way.

My GPAA membership will expire in September. I gave GPAA one more chance last go-'roundbased upon promises from Temecula. Those promises have gone unfullfulled.

I cannot, in good faith, renew unless there are very drastic changes centered around customer service and providing information directly to the membership.

I've joined with AMRA, who has zero bueracracy and many very good claims - as well as operating as a non-profit that throws all donations and membership dues towards the legal issues, PLP, and additional claims.

Sorry, GPAA - you don't have the "personal touch" any longer that the Buzzard was so proud of.

GPAA, please focus on the reason why you are in business to begin with.

respectfully, goodbye, and I do wish the best of luck,
B.S. Miner.

GPAA on the other hand, does not seem to directly advocate for the prospector or small-scale miner - they would rather just channel funds to the PLP and not do any heavy lifting.

I have to agree with the above message. I have been trying to find the place to take the name and address off the web site. And B.S. is right about the amount of gold found on the claims. We have mined mostly in Arizona..... Not even enough gold to pay the yearly dues.

contributes to identity theft?

With name and location, it might give a leg up.

irritating

  

'doc

As a new member, I agree with the others who object. When listed my user name, which is the same I use on other forums, I expected to be using that - not using my real name. This is like wearing my skivvies over my pants.

Ok so why are we not seeing any replies from the leadership? Or is there any?

I don't think they want to be bothered with it. Even tho it's been posted that some members from the old forum are avoiding this forum because of it. We lost a lot of contributors for this reason.

Then I guess they need to be directly confronted with the questions until they are answered for everyone. As a side note, I read something in a members post that I wanted to know a little more about the definition of the word. Well I Google'd the word which was ... crystalline lamproite......and guess what....HIS name came up on the Google search showing GPAA.......so now it leaves me wondering.

ok, here's how I see it:

1. there were a lot of heated debates on the old boards.
2. GPAA admin (as of March 2014), had not posted any warning, answered any questions, or had any useful interactions in the old forums *since* *2008*
3. rather than moderate as every other forum does (anywhere!), the GPAA simply permanently banned longtime GPAA, LDMA, and small time miners.
4. GPAA puts up new message board in April 2014, using names rather than handles, in an effort to combat heated discussions, which are a natural part of ANY forum.
5. GPAA, on launch, has many staffers present, but very little traffic. They've nothing to do. Waste of time and salary.
6. Members, after registering for the new forum, discover that their real, Christian names are being used for any and all forum posts.
7. GPAA / LDMA Members express frustration with this new naming convention. There is the barest of hints from GPAA that they are trying to avoid the heated debates of the old forum. (many members would chime in on these debates, and would ultimately find them either informative or entertaining.)
8. At this point, it is apparent that GPAA absolutely does not want to be involved in policing their own message boards, which is part of the package when a CORPORATION decides to put one up.
9. GPAA/LDMA members decide to leave the GPAA board and post elsewhere.

You'll get no support, or a completely non-committal answer from any GPAA staffer who decides to chime in on this thread. I've got a pound of black sand, the most valuable thing I've recovered from GPAA claims, riding on this statement.

Brandon, here's what you MUST do for GPAA to survive the next 5-10 years:

1. Advocate HEAVILY for mining rights in the USA. This must originate from WITHIN THE GPAA. Lobbyists? Email and letter campaigns, similar to what the opposition is doing?
2. Continue to assist the PLP at current levels.
3. Press GPAA lawyers into service to cover what PLP cannot. There are MANY fronts out there that need to be covered.
4. STOP working against the efforts of WMA, AMRA, and other mining rights organizations. They are *NOT* your competitors. Coordinate efforts for change.
5. Keep the GPAA membership INFORMED of what GPAA is doing to protect their Constitutional Rights to the Peoples' Own Lands. (You'll need to specify what GPAA is doing. PLP, AMRA & WMA will let us know what they are doing on their own).
6. Publish, on-line, accurate and up-to date claim information. (This has been talked about for well over five years, maybe 10.) This may be a lost cause, unless the format of the "new" forums change. A case of too little too late.
7. Get *good* claims, actually OWNED by GPAA, and stop relying on poor-quality, donated claims.
8. Temecula needs to LEAD, and not shove the heavy lifting and responsibilities off on the non-profit chapters. There's a very strange "point system" for the chapters to "receive favour" from Temecula. In other words, the chapters need to do something extraordinary to get Temecula to notice them.

GPAA will not exist within 10 years if the above is not done. You've let things slide that far.

Members, once they discover that GPAA is all about the bottom line and not about actually promoting Constitutionally Protected activities, will leave. I've stuck around for three years, and all I've seen are empty promises and GPAA sliding....

Tom Massie is the embodiment of "Mining the miners", as much as he seems to dislike that statement on his TV show, it's exactly what he's doing.

Support those who are looking out for your interests. GPAA currently is not.

I fully expect the above to be deleted, and then I'll be banned. That's fine. Not the first time I've been silenced for speaking my mind. My membership expires in September, and so does any interest in seeing GPAA succeed.