Beefing up official member requirements |
| *mzkandi* |
 Oct 23 2005, 04:52 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Guest  |
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. |
|
|
|
 |
Replies
| *mipadi* |
Oct 24 2005, 06:50 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Guest |
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. |
|
|
|
Posts in this topic
mzkandi Beefing up official member requirements Oct 23 2005, 04:52 PM
Retrogressive I think it should go up to 100. It's too easy ... Oct 23 2005, 04:57 PM iNyCxShoRT Hmm...I agree with Retrogressive. But it could be ... Oct 23 2005, 05:06 PM racoons > you i actually think it should be as high as 250. peop... Oct 23 2005, 05:15 PM incoherent i agree with the 250 posts. it shows that they are... Oct 23 2005, 05:18 PM racoons > you ^
that really relies on the member feature gettin... Oct 23 2005, 05:21 PM not_your_average I think we should do random checks for official me... Oct 23 2005, 05:22 PM Frankie i was also thinking somewhere along the lines of 2... Oct 23 2005, 05:24 PM
incoherent QUOTE(Frankie @ Oct 23 2005, 5:24 PM)and i al... Oct 23 2005, 05:27 PM racoons > you i disagree about the ppd. i think 5 is fine Oct 23 2005, 05:28 PM disco infiltrator 10 is asking way too much of normal people.
Not a... Oct 23 2005, 05:29 PM Frankie QUOTE(disco infiltrator @ Oct 23 2005, 5:29 P... Oct 23 2005, 05:41 PM ermfermoo I have a question.
I've been a member of Crea... Oct 23 2005, 05:46 PM Azarel QUOTE(ermfermoo @ Oct 23 2005, 3:46 PM)I have... Oct 23 2005, 05:48 PM SillyCourtney I agree that the minimum posts count should be upp... Oct 23 2005, 05:48 PM racoons > you it isnt possible to measure it.
but i do think th... Oct 23 2005, 05:48 PM Azarel QUOTE(racoons > you @ Oct 23 2005, 3:48 PM... Oct 23 2005, 05:52 PM racoons > you get a certain number of official members to endors... Oct 23 2005, 05:52 PM incoherent ^
but that gets back to the point of endorsements ... Oct 23 2005, 05:52 PM incoherent ^
anna, you do make a valid point.
maybe would c... Oct 23 2005, 05:55 PM incoherent ^
yes, thats why i said something about it.
i thi... Oct 23 2005, 05:58 PM sadolakced acid i think ppd should be removed...
it should simply... Oct 23 2005, 06:01 PM disco infiltrator It is no one's fault but theirs. Maybe they sh... Oct 23 2005, 06:03 PM not_your_average I don't think we need endorsements for officia... Oct 23 2005, 06:06 PM je like french this wouldn't affect the current official memb... Oct 23 2005, 06:07 PM disco infiltrator PPD is needed to make sure the person is active NO... Oct 23 2005, 06:08 PM racoons > you hmm.
i would say not. Oct 23 2005, 06:09 PM Spiritual Winged Aura Can the previous official member requirements rema... Oct 23 2005, 09:31 PM KissMe2408 I think the 5 ppd for official members should stay... Oct 24 2005, 01:59 PM tweeak Hell, I've gotten well over 50 posts in a day ... Oct 24 2005, 03:54 PM incoherent QUOTE(tweeak @ Oct 24 2005, 3:54 PM)Hell, I... Oct 24 2005, 03:54 PM mzkandi I say 200-250........ Oct 24 2005, 03:55 PM tweeak Yeah, 300 is too high. I say 200 is fine. Oct 24 2005, 03:56 PM incoherent QUOTEYeah, 300 is too high. I say 200 is fine.
alr... Oct 24 2005, 03:58 PM racoons > you im holding out for 250
nay Oct 24 2005, 04:02 PM mzkandi ^ huh??? what are we voting on?? what numbers?? Oct 24 2005, 04:02 PM incoherent ^
QUOTEall in favor of 200 posts for official memb... Oct 24 2005, 04:03 PM mzkandi ^ Oh I'm use to James starting the voting........ Oct 24 2005, 04:04 PM tweeak aye Oct 24 2005, 04:07 PM racoons > you it confused me when someone else started the vote ... Oct 24 2005, 04:10 PM Spirited Away aye. 200 is good enough. Oct 24 2005, 04:10 PM incoherent ^x2
sorry
kiera i deleted those posts. im getting... Oct 24 2005, 04:12 PM KissMe2408 Aye
200 is a good amount. Oct 24 2005, 04:40 PM disco infiltrator Well I guess six have probably already said Aye, b... Oct 24 2005, 05:46 PM racoons > you actually the vote is still open, with 5 ayes, and ... Oct 25 2005, 11:05 AM Spiritual Winged Aura aye. Oct 25 2005, 11:43 PM racoons > you with 6 ayes, the motion requiring official members... Oct 26 2005, 07:43 AM mzkandi ^ The post per day is 5, right? I forget whether w... Oct 26 2005, 08:51 AM racoons > you yes, i think we've established that it will re... Oct 27 2005, 07:32 AM mzkandi ^ OK =) Oct 27 2005, 01:14 PM not_your_average Hold up. Since there's a 200 post requirement ... Oct 28 2005, 11:23 AM disco infiltrator We've discussed that already..more than once. ... Oct 28 2005, 12:51 PM incoherent thats just what we voted on. they at least have to... Oct 28 2005, 12:52 PM Spiritual Winged Aura So, we're done ? Oct 28 2005, 09:54 PM incoherent i think weve discussed everything. feel free to op... Oct 29 2005, 01:50 AM |
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: