Gatchamania.net - Print: What do you reckon then?

Gatchamania.net (http://www.gatchamania.net/index.php)
- [Speak Up!] (http://www.gatchamania.net/board.php?boardid=500)
-- The Debating Room (http://www.gatchamania.net/board.php?boardid=12)
--- What do you reckon then? (http://www.gatchamania.net/threadid.php?threadid=120)

Posted by Cep on 30-04-2004 at 22:18:

What do you reckon then?

I knew that when I posted the new Membership controls it might cause some anxiety so lets have a debate so I may see what ya think and also to possible trim the rules to something better.

Afterall I aim to please Big Grin

.....and where I can't....... I crush all opposition mercilesly! Devilgrin

__________________
Thanks Cep

Gatchamania.net Administrator Gatch

Posted by Buffy on 30-04-2004 at 22:26:

I'm kind of in the 'agree in principle but would rethink first' boat. I posted my general suggestions and thoughts in the Announcement page under the membership controls thingie for ya, so I won't be redundant here. Twirl

__________________

"Spider sense....tingling."

Posted by meridianday on 30-04-2004 at 22:38:

I see the idea behind this, but I think the period of inactivity before blocking needs to be increased. Like FB said, accidents and illness will keep people from posting, as will holidays and real life.

Also, how much of a problem are spambots etc likely to be? Previous problems on the forum have been due to very human trolls, not automated systems.

__________________

Mallanox : "My mother was Irish and my father was an alien. I was an only child and I dress funny." Devilstar

Posted by Cep on 30-04-2004 at 22:44:

Well as I just mentioned in another thread I just caught two bots prodding there way on the new site and not getting in and one that had settled on the archive forum which I have now blocked and deleted.

Someone is deliberatly pointing these bots to this site and I know their IP addresses and where there server is stationed so if they arent careful they are going to know what it means to mess a hacker about.

__________________
Thanks Cep

Gatchamania.net Administrator Gatch

Posted by CricketBeautiful on 01-05-2004 at 00:56:

Flipping between tweaking and complete rethink.

I'll vote for tweaking, because you have addressed most concerns -- blocking rather than deleting, and all we have to do is email you to get around the rules.

I'd say increase the times, drastically. Once people sign up, it may take a while for them to adjust to the mood and feel comfortable here. I have no problem with lurkers. Maybe a semi-annual purge of dead accounts -- anyone who doesn't respond to a "are you still alive" email.

Is there really that much of an equipment issue with keeping extra accounts?

Also reduce the number of posts to gain a more permanent status. A few posts a week over several months is better than a ton of posts and then nothing.

Spam bots and porn bots, well, that's another story. They do damage a community. Lock out, big time. And complain to their ISPs.

Can you email new applicants a question requiring a human to answer? That would cut down on the bots.

Cricket

__________________
Between stimulus and response there is a space.
In that space is our power to choose our response.
In our response lies our growth and our freedom.

- Viktor E. Frankl

Posted by Firebird on 01-05-2004 at 05:07:

Like Cricket I am aware new members like to look around and read yp posts to see if this site is the sort of place they might like to be active.

Just by lowering the amount needed to be a permanent member a making the deadlines longer say 3 weeks for the first a month or 6 weeks for permanent members should hopefully just ease things

Just a suggestion

__________________
Like the Phoenix I rise from the fire. Beware all who try to tame me, you may get burned Flame

Posted by Cep on 01-05-2004 at 10:04:

I'm not leaving new members 3 weeks thats just far too long and trolls will easily get around it.

__________________
Thanks Cep

Gatchamania.net Administrator Gatch

Posted by CricketBeautiful on 02-05-2004 at 18:03:

My brain's hit brainstorming mode. Some of these ideas are very different from the existing scheme.

Use, abuse, ignore, or bounce off of, as you see fit.

First, what are the reasons for these rules?

To conserve resources.

To stop posts we don't like, and abuse of PMs and email through the site. These come from both bots and humans.

To encourage people to participate. Or is that pushing it? I have no problems with lurkers -- as far as I'm concerned, they're just as welcome as anyone else. Encouragement to participate should come from other members being welcoming -- frisking and all.

To weed out "dead" accounts.

+++

New members are those who haven't yet proven that they are not robots or spammers or other abusers.

Idea: new members get ten free posts -- enough to feel involved right away, but not enough to flood the place if they are abusers. Sometime after post five, admin decides if they're mechanical or human, and, if human, participating -- as in, actually reading what's here.

If they never use up their free posts, I see no danger in letting them lurk, so long as they're actually here every so often. Maybe visit every few weeks, even if they don't post.

Obvious abusers, of course, we don't have to wait before kicking them off. That includes PMing or emailing members, not just stuff posted on the boards.

Posts from new members get reviewed before posting. Yeah, sure. As if anyone has the time. And it might slow down their getting involved. Then again, other sites do just that, relying on a team of very efficient moderators.

Maybe new members' posts do go up immediately, but admin gets a tool to review just those posts, so it can be done quickly, and action taken if they're abusers.

New members must be active over time -- long enough that a human nasty would give up.

One or two posts a week for two months is better than 10 posts in one week and then nothing.

Is there a way to distinguish long-term lurkers from dead accounts? Emailing them and asking, "are you a lurker or dead?" would work, but do be careful about the tone.

+++

Also, several of us, myself included, are having problems balancing RL and online time. Any requirement to come here frequently or do lots of posts may subvert hard-won progress. Anything that feels even remotely like pressure to make a choice between keeping my posts up and the rest of my life will be fought against -- it's human nature.

Take a look at country constitutions -- they begin with the goals, and then get into how they'll meet them. Not that everyone agrees on all the goals, but it does explain why the rules are set in place.

Cheers,

Cricket
<who is going to mention Princess dancing during today's session in the word mines, honest>

__________________
Between stimulus and response there is a space.
In that space is our power to choose our response.
In our response lies our growth and our freedom.

- Viktor E. Frankl