Ok, I was looking through the feedback forum and there is one thread that members and offical members alike have been debating about, whether or not to raise the official member requirements. Like, whether the posts to become an offical member should stay 50 or is upped to 100 or so like that. I dont think there has been much debate on the 5ppd requirement, mostly is pertains to the amount of post required.


--------------------

Some members have complained that its too easy to become an offical member, that you can become an offical member in a couple of hours. I think that with the ppd requirement in inacted that those who become inactive will be demotted, something the admins have actively become in involved in doing. I really see no need for an increase.

I think it should go up to 100. It's too easy for a n00b to spam for a day et cetera. Plus once a member gains Offical Membership and looses track of their 5 PPD it's just extra work for the mods to have to demote them again.

Hmm...I agree with Retrogressive. But it could be hard to get 5 ppd. Then again, spammers -- the classic. I say, change it to 100.

i actually think it should be as high as 250. people actually get something out of being an official member, they ought to earn it

*oh*

and i also meant to add (sorry i cant edit my post, but my internet's latest fun trick is to shut down when ever i access the official reply screen, or when i try to write a pm, so i may double post if is is unavoidbale, bu ti cant actually edit my posts) should we discuss in this thread exactly what the privaleges for official members will be?

-----
you can just merge them like i just did.

i agree with the 250 posts. it shows that they are interested in being around.

other discussions.

how often should checks be given to see those who have fallen below the 5 ppd?

^

that really relies on the member feature getting fixed

I think we should do random checks for official members, the same way Jusun does random checks in the backstage forum to see if mods are active.

Wait, I think it says in the official members thread that mods check all the time, so I guess it already is a random check. :/

i was also thinking somewhere along the lines of 250 posts or so. 50 is just too little and it is just waste of the current admin's time to go into the control panel and change their status to official member whenever after a few weeks, the person is never going to come back to createBlog and they are just going to let their ppd drop drastically.

and i also think that the ppd needs to be 10. ;\
but that's just me. it could be asking for too much.

maybe not so much 10 because in the mod thing, they only wanted to increase their post per day to 7. i mean there are people already complaining about 5 ppd so with 10 it might turn more members away and not wanting to come back, but then again, that gets rid of the people that dont really want the advantages or to stay around.

i disagree about the ppd. i think 5 is fine

10 is asking way too much of normal people.

Not all of us have no lives Frankie.

Plus, if just Official Members have to have 10, that'd knock off a lot of mods.

true.

I have a question.

I've been a member of Createblog since like May 2004, but I haven't posted since January 2005. Really, its impossible for me to make genuine posts and reach 5 ppd. I'd have to spam like crazy to get there. So, what about people like me? I think we should change it to 5ppd from when you started posting. Not from when you got an account. I don't know if thats possible though.

But the forum doesn't support that; it's been suggested before. Either you start posting more often to raise you ppd or just create a new username.

It's not impossible to raise you ppd after a long hiatus; I did it. *beams*

I agree that the minimum posts count should be upped to 200-250, but I think the ppd is fine. I'm barely keeping up with 5 ppd due to I'm so busy with school and marching band, so 10 ppd would be.. well.. super difficult.

it isnt possible to measure it.

but i do think that (especially if we decide on more privaleges for official members) there ought to be a recognized appeal for official member status for cases like ariel's.

i mean, he is clearly an active, well known member of cb, but cant become an official member.

get a certain number of official members to endorse you, and PM and admin?

^
but that gets back to the point of endorsements in which we threw out.

So then, if this appeal idea were to take effect, what would you look at for said members' qualifications? I mean, if you can't look at their ppd, what else do you look at? I personally don't think it's such a great idea for reputation and recognition to factor into official membership.

Because, come on. In all, I've been on hiatus for nine months - six months, one month, two month. I worked like hell to get my post count up; why shouldn't everyone else..? It isn't fair that certain people worked to get that thing up while, perhaps soon, they can just appeal.

^
anna, you do make a valid point.

maybe would could introduce something like they did with changing usernames. have a valid reason behind why you think you deserve it and have a mod conduct a check to see if you havent spammed, etc.

but then, like anna stated, it does kind of give the people that worked their butts off to get 5 ppd a reason to be mad since they worked so hard and a member can get it just by sucking up.

^
yes, thats why i said something about it.

i think that if they cant get it, thats their fault, honestly.

i think ppd should be removed...

it should simply be minimum posts, minimum join time.

2 weeks joined, 500 posts.

It is no one's fault but theirs. Maybe they should've posted when they joined. It's not that hard to do 5 posts per day that you were gone. If you were gone for six months, do 5 for that many days. No one said you had to do it all in one day, either. Just do it. Suck it up, cupcake.

Or just make a new username.
Also not that hard.

i know but that gets back to the whole "only your friends endorse" you thing.

I don't think we need endorsements for official membership. That's asking for a little too much. I do think, however, that we should increase the post requirement to 250. 5 ppd isn't hard. In fact, I'm posting a lot right now.

this wouldn't affect the current official members who don't meet the new requirements (if accepted), correct?

PPD is needed to make sure the person is active NOW and didn't just apply 4 months ago and now decides they want to be active and official and all. Or something. If they made posts 4 months ago and aren't active, dedicated members, why should we promote them?

hmm.

i would say not.

Can the previous official member requirements remain the same but different than the in-coming new official member requirements base on the joined date? It’s fair for us.

I think the 5 ppd for official members should stay the same. 10 would be way to much, and 7 was for mods? i think
And i really do think 50 posts is too small of a number. I see some new members join and post 30 in the first few hours.
I think it should be bumped up to about 200.

Hell, I've gotten well over 50 posts in a day before.

me too. i say we go to 250-300.

I say 200-250........

Yeah, 300 is too high. I say 200 is fine.

alright, since a lot of people have post around the 200 mark for official members post, all in favor of 200 posts for official members, say aye.

aye.

im holding out for 250

nay

^ huh??? what are we voting on?? what numbers??

^

^ Oh I'm use to James starting the voting......


aye.

aye

it confused me when someone else started the vote as well... i was like .. i swear i dont remember that

3 ayes, 1 nay

aye. 200 is good enough.

^x2
sorry

kiera i deleted those posts. im getting so confused and realized we had already discussed that. this is all just jumbled together and making me lose track.

Aye

200 is a good amount.

Well I guess six have probably already said Aye, but I think 250 would be good so Nay.

I think it would be better to have a system based on posts per day, if anything. As noted, it's easy to get 50; it's not that hard to get 200, either, and you'd still see people spamming to get up that high. It would be better to have a combination of a minimum posts per day and a time limit. For example, after 30 days, a candidate for official membership would have to have 5 or more posts per day. If a person sticks around for a month and maintains an average of 5 posts per day, they're pretty dedicated--much more so than someone who sticks around just long enough to get 200 posts.

I vote nay on a minimum post count requirement.

actually the vote is still open, with 5 ayes, and 3 nays

aye.

with 6 ayes, the motion requiring official members to have a minimum post count of 200 has passed.

^ The post per day is 5, right? I forget whether we voted on that or not >.<