Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 25 of 50

Thread: Disappointed!

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2013
    I totally agree. That is very sad and really unfair. I think people should just talk about future baby names and all sorts. There is plenty of room for that. I toally agree with @casilda. they should post fake babies in the name games forum. There is just no point of that.
    married to my wonderful husband--P.J.
    mommy to--- Bridger Alexander(7) , Avery Matthew(3) and Owen Samuel arrived on September 5th!!!

    current favorites---
    boys--Bridger,Avery, Owen, Tristan, Cory,Brody, Justin, Porter, Morrison, Axel, Finn and Ira

    girls---Natalie, Brooklyn, Penelope, Paige, Heather, Emerson, Eleanor, Beth, Jenna and Meredith

  2. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    South Australia
    This is the reason I don't comment on birth announcements for twins, triplets etc. because I think 90% of them are fake. It's sad the people feel the need to invent fake children.
    The 3 Princesses in my life...

    Elizabeth Hope
    Annabelle Cadence
    Madeleine Pearl

  3. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Personally, I have been surprised that Nameberry hasn't initialized a process for confirming births before now. I think the one-sock feet picture with the baby's name written on paper is a pretty ingenious idea. It preserves privacy, doesn't exclude home births, and makes photoshopping inconvenient.

    It might also be worth considering leaving the Birth Announcements forum as it is, and adding a dedicated link on Nameberry allowing parents to submit their child's name directly to Pam/Linda/site administrators. This could require the foot/name photograph, or something else. If a picture were only going to the administrators and had guaranteed privacy from them -- you know, that the pictures are only for confirmation purposes and get deleted after X months or whatever, and I'm not going to load up Nameberry someday and find myself in one of the blog slide-show features or something like that -- I wouldn't object to more stringent requirements, like sending a picture of myself with the baby and the name written out. Or even a full family picture with the baby's name written out, since I have one of those large families which, while rare, are actually legit. I think it would be worthwhile to go through a screening process, because I'm afraid many people do think my large family is fake. I don't blame them; it would put up red flags for me, too -- but if the administrators approved my family's legitimacy, other Berries could know I'm not a fake while I would maintain my family's privacy. A screening process for the official blog seems both prudent and fair in my estimation.

    Mama to C, Z, E, P, D, G & Agent 007

    Currently Under Consideration:
    Iolanthe "Isla" :: Zerelda :: Zelda :: Zipporah :: Leonora :: Una :: Luna
    Cressida :: Araluen :: Marigold "Molly" :: Zuzu :: Lottie :: Lilou

    The "Just In Case" List
    Horatio Frederic Eto :: Ragnar Ethan Rigel :: Rainier Ozias Ethan

  4. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Bay Area
    @saracita00 - I think that's an ingenious idea, but it seems like so much work! I think it would cause a lot of new mothers quite a hassle to go through all of these guidelines just to prove their birth is legit.
    Catalina || 18 || College Student

    Girls: Augusta || Bryony || Caroline || Elizabeth || Katherine || Margaret || Rosemary || Ruth
    Boys: Adrian || August || Bennett || Elliott || Ezra || Foster || Joel || Lowe || Porter || Weston

  5. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    London, England
    What's going to stop people to take a photo of their niece/nephew/little siblings foot and submit it?

    It's sad that there are fakers, but this is the internet, it's going to happen.
    My darling Marian Illyria Aphrodite, March 2013 & Little Bunny (a girl!) due 9th of February 2014

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts