or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post Minimum / Waiting Period Required for New Members to Start a New Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post Minimum / Waiting Period Required for New Members to Start a New Thread

Poll Results: In Order to Start a Thread, New Members Should Have

 
  • 28% (11)
    A Post Minimum
  • 53% (21)
    A Waiting Period
  • 17% (7)
    No Requirements (USA! USA! USA! USA!)
39 Total Votes  
post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Cross-post from "Constructive Ideas for Improving the Forum"


Should SF implement a waiting period or post threshold for new members to start a thread?

After the rapture, the forum seems to be more bogged down with lazy/redundant questions by brand new posters and spammers - so many "recommend first suit, does this look good, was this a good buy, where can i get this, check out this blog, check out my new #menswear brand etc." A thread starting requirement would help cut down on spam and the members who join just to ask a question without referring to the MILLIONS of posts (in MC alone) by knowledgeable members beforehand.

I don't know about the logistics, but a message that popped up when new users tried to create a thread might help direct members to the search:

"Sorry new members must wait X days to create a new thread. Try to use the "Search Function" to find if the topic has already been addressed or ask a question here: Ask a Question get a an Answer."

New members could still post and contribute - just not start a thread.

Quality of content would be improve. New members would be directed by force to appropriate threads and quality poasts of yesteryear.
Edited by marblehouse - 4/23/12 at 2:33pm
post #2 of 38

I think a 7 day waiting period would prevent the redundent or nnecessary topics you are looking at. A lot of these are "hit-n-run" poster, join, mkae one post and never return.

post #3 of 38
this would clear up so many of the redundant threads that clog up MC. Great idea.
post #4 of 38
Great idea. I voted waiting period but post count would also work.
post #5 of 38
what in the hell are you guys talking about clothing for, anyway?

Man up, pull on a toga, and get out there.
post #6 of 38

lol @ starting a new thread for a topic more appropriately discussed in an existing thread, specifically to complain about how many new threads there are, when there are more appropriate existing threads. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by marblehouse View Post

Cross-post from "Constructive Ideas for Improving the Forum"
Should SF implement a 30-60 day waiting period or post threshold for new members to start a thread?
After the rapture, the forum seems to be more bogged down with lazy/redundant questions by brand new posters and spammers - so many "recommend first suit, does this look good, was this a good buy, where can i get this, check out this blog, check out my new #menswear brand etc." A thread starting requirement would help cut down on spam and the members who join just to ask a question without referring to the MILLIONS of posts (in MC alone) by knowledgeable members beforehand.
I don't know about the logistics, but a message that popped up when new users tried to create a thread might help direct members to the search:
"Sorry new members must wait X days to create a new thread. Try to use the "Search Function" to find if the topic has already been addressed or ask a question here: Ask a Question get a an Answer."
New members could still post and contribute - just not start a thread.
Quality of content would be improve. New members would be directed by force to appropriate threads and quality poasts of yesteryear.

 

 

post #7 of 38
One forum that I'm a member of requires that one's first four or five posts (posts, not threads) be approved by a moderator. That seems to keep it free of spammers and most idiots. Not saying we should do that here - I doubt the mods have time.

Personally, the "what red shirt should I wear with my black suit to prom?" newbie threads annoy me a bit, but I can usually tolerate (ie ignore) them. The spammers do really p155 me off though. Some mechanism that worked against them would get my vote.
post #8 of 38
Probably couldn't hurt. But I think the real issue is the lack of interesting discussion. The n00b threads aren't drowning out more spirited conversation so much as filling the void left by its absence.
post #9 of 38
Sometimes a new poster has something legitimitely interestign to say, or a time-sensitive question that would require digging through a 523 page threak. When't the last time any of you ventured into the "Ask a question thread" to helpa n00b? that's what I thought.

It doesn't hurt anyone to let them post. i'm sorry, but your little clubhouse just isn't that exclusive.
post #10 of 38

One of the most idiotic ideas presented on a forum.

 

A post count of 50 - coupled with 35 second buffer seperating consecutive posts - is enough to deter "hit & run posters" et. al.

post #11 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post

Probably couldn't hurt. But I think the real issue is the lack of interesting discussion. The n00b threads aren't drowning out more spirited conversation so much as filling the void left by its absence.

I agree - this is no panacea. Maybe the void of spirited conversations could be fixed by... more spirits?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post

Sometimes a new poster has something legitimitely interestign to say, or a time-sensitive question that would require digging through a 523 page threak. When't the last time any of you ventured into the "Ask a question thread" to helpa n00b? that's what I thought.
It doesn't hurt anyone to let them post. i'm sorry, but your little clubhouse just isn't that exclusive.

facepalm.gif

Re-read the OP. Not against new members or at all elitist. They can still post, just not start new threads for a short period of time. Directing new members to use the search and the "Ask a Question thread" helps introduce them to the forum, use past threads as reference, and serve as a slight barrier to spam/trolls. Do you really think this is a terrible idea or are you just being a contrarian dickhead?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrayDorian View Post

One of the most idiotic ideas presented on a forum.

 

A post count of 50 - coupled with 35 second buffer seperating consecutive posts - is enough to deter "hit & run posters" et. al.


Sounds like you think it's the most idiotic thing ever suggested on an internet forum, but you also agree with it.
Edited by marblehouse - 4/23/12 at 11:59am
post #12 of 38
My only words against this are that it seems like you are punishing all new members for the sins of a few (OK more than a few but not all). People typically come across this forum because they begin with a problem and need help in solving it. If you remove their right to make that first post, it is more difficult, plus some are just downright funny and inspire amusing threads. You can say they can post in the "Ask a Question" thread, but answers in that thread are slower and fewer people typically answer you. Also, when new people search the forums, their search text brings up threads with common words in the title of the post, seldom have I ever been searching for something and found it in the "Ask a Question" thread. Maybe make it so that can only post every so often for a period of time?

My 2c
post #13 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by marblehouse View Post

I agree - this is no panacea. Maybe the void of spirited conversations could be fixed by... more spirits?
facepalm.gif
Re-read the OP. Not against new members or at all elitist. They can still post, just not start new threads for a short period of time. Directing new members to use the search and the "Ask a Question thread" helps introduce them to the forum, use past threads as reference, and serve as a slight barrier to spam/trolls. Do you really think this is a terrible idea or are you just being a contrarian dickhead?
.

How can I put this? U Mad.

I ask again, how often do you venture into the "ask a question" thread? Never. Who's going to answer those questions? A very simple question that half of the forum could answer cound languish unanswered for days in that thread. It makes sense that a noob would post a special flower thread. If they upset you ignore them...or even better, post a reply that makes them feel stupid and worthless to show the rest of us what a seasoned forvmite you've become.
post #14 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post

Probably couldn't hurt. But I think the real issue is the lack of interesting discussion. The n00b threads aren't drowning out more spirited conversation so much as filling the void left by its absence.

sadly, I agree
post #15 of 38

I just think that not all members should suffer because of the idiotic behavior of a few. I am a long time readers of StyleForum yet  I do not post regularly.

To be honest I am one of the members with least posts on my own website and forums which is ironic for an administrator is it not? There will always be new people searching for a specific pair of shoes or jeans or something else and when they do not get their answer in the Ask a question thread, they make a new thread dedicated to the products they are looking for. And if you do make a minimum post count (which is better than a waiting period since everyone will contribute this way), it should not be above 30 posts.This is just my 50 cent.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post Minimum / Waiting Period Required for New Members to Start a New Thread