A Suggestion by Charles: Newbie Rights

[Charles]

I would like to suggest that new members, from this time forth, no longer have the ability to create new threads. So that's what I'm going to do.

Instead, during their time as new members, they'll be regulated to posting within existing discussions. Initially, I was discussing the idea with Lady A. as something that would only be applied to Otaku Anthology, but upon fleshing the idea out more, we've agreed that it would be even more beneficial if applied to the entire site. Right now, I'm going to dismiss any accusations claiming that new members can't post quality threads or contribute in a positive way. They're not a large problem. Many are able to jump right in.

Regardless, I believe that it would be a means to ensure that they completely understand how the site works and how to contribute properly within existing discussions before they create their own. It would also eliminate the occasional introduction thread, incoherent thread or duplicate thread.

Considering how new posters only need fifty posts to become a member, I don't think it's such a harsh idea. That number could even be reduced by half with this measure in place. In the end, the learning curve here would improve and there would be even less of an excuse for poor threads.

okthxbye.

[Lady Asphyxia]

[font=Verdana][size=1]It's been implied, but I do agree with this idea.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=1]As Charles said, such a move would decrease duplicate threads, incoherant threads and the "what's your favourite ..." threads, since most members already know such threads aren't allowed. By the time Newbies are able to create new threads, they will have learnt the basic ins and outs of Otakuboards. [/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=1]At the moment, New Members are only New Members for 50 posts, which isn't a large amount. By 20 posts, most members have learnt what OB is about, and have a grasp of the rules and the community here, so even half of the current 'New Member' post count would be enough to ensure that a New Member knows how to get around.[/size][/font]

[font=Verdana][size=1]By limiting the New Members' ability to post threads, it will allow them a period of 'learning' before beginning to create their own threads. In my opinion, it'll only increase the post quality here.[/size][/font]

[Panda]

I see the benefits of this idea. It would eliminate the introduction threads that seem to pop up every now and again. It would also help new members see how things work on the boards. On the flip side I worry that preventing someone from starting a new thread could cause some new members to try to get their 50 posts in as quickly as possible. Quantity being put second to quality. If a new member wanted to start a new thread they may be tempted to respond to a bunch of threads just to get their member status. I just worry that post quality may suffer because of the rule.

Other than that I like the idea. I do see thread quality increasing since members will have a better idea of what is expected when starting a thread. I just worry about the individual post quality becoming poor so a new member can start a thread.

[DeadSeraphim]

[FONT=Arial][COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1]It's brilliant.[/SIZE][/COLOR][/FONT]

[Charles]

[quote name='Panda']On the flip side I worry that preventing someone from starting a new thread could cause some new members to try to get their 50 posts in as quickly as possible. Quantity being put second to quality.[/quote]
It's good that you brought that up. I had it in mind when I introduced the idea but forgot to address it. The simple answer is that pruning is relatively easy to do and only takes seconds. Furthermore, when people pull silly stunts like that, it will identify them as poor members early, and staff will be able to eliminate them before they can produce equally poor threads.

[Dagger]

I've always disliked having to attain a certain level to gain more rights at a forum--I can understand why some sites would need to implement a similar system, and I've seen it more far-reaching variations of it used to good effect, but I don't feel that such restrictions are necessary here. From what I can tell, at least, the staff is more than capable of handling our current levels of new-member spam.

I agree that this would solve some problems, but at the same time I don't think I'd want to see it implemented. It would have the unintentional side effect of making the entire message board seem more exclusive and less welcoming, at least from my perspective. If I joined a forum that wouldn't let me create threads until I amassed a certain number of posts, I know I would be rather perplexed and irritated.

Can I assume new members would still be permitted to create threads in the Suggestions & Feedback forum?

Lastly, one thing I definitely would support is disabling the reply & quick-reply buttons for the member who has made the last post in a thread (i.e. to totally block double-posting).

~Dagger~

[Panda]

[quote name='Charles']Furthermore, when people pull silly stunts like that, it will identify them as poor members early, and staff will be able to eliminate them before they can produce equally poor threads.[/quote]
True, very true. We would see the poor quality posters and set them on the right path before they make a thread of the same poor quality.
[quote name='Dagger IX1']Lastly, one thing I definitely would support is disabling the reply & quick-reply buttons for the member who has made the last post in a thread (i.e. to totally block double-posting).[/quote]
I definitely second this suggestion. That would help quite a bit dealing with the double posts. I am not sure how many times I have seen double and triple posts by new members who don't understand the rules.

[Charles]

[font=Tahoma][size=2]I'm kind of glad that you brought these issues up--because other than Panda's concern, they're along the lines of what I was expecting in opposition to my proposal.

[/size][/font][size=2]My rebuttal to this argument is that this measure isn't born from [i]necessity. [/i]Obviously, there's no issue surrounding an influx of low quality new members running rampant, bogging down the forums with terrible threads whilst a helpless staff stand idly by, scratching their heads. Even "The Deal With This Member" thread has slowed down significantly. But because it isn't a necessity being applied to a pressing issue, I don't view it as much of a restriction at all. The lack of terrible new member issues actually eliminates any sort of hostile air the idea could be mistaken to have. [/size]

[size=2]I see this not as a way of alleviating staff of burden (because it's just not the case at all), but as a way of [i]helping[/i] new members and[i] easing[/i] them into the proceedings. It's not a vote of no-confidence on anyone's part, the staff's or the new membership's. On the contrary, I view it as a simple tweak that would further improve the effectiveness of the "New Member" rank, making it a significantly worthwhile, although hopelessly brief, tutorial.

Any concerns about the forums appearing unwelcoming would hold water if the "Member" rank required a significant amount of posts to attain, but that's simply not the case. One could even argue that your logic is quite contradictory. I'd say that it can seem more unwelcoming, as you put it, to obtain a membership here, post a thread, let's say an introduction thread or a gay marriage thread and have it locked in view of everyone on the main topic listing. Even if it is done so in a friendly way. There's typically a number of normal members that group up within such threads and point out the mistake if staff aren't around discover it immediately, creating a feeling of alienation. Instantly, new members may feel that they've started off on the wrong foot and become discouraged. My measure would be a security blanket to prevent that from happening.

If the number of posts required for "Member" status were reduced to twenty-five, I'd hardly call that a[i]mass[/i]ing posts. The language there implies that they're being burdened with the task of enduring a long period of posting before being welcomed fully into the community.

Also, it's not exclusive in that they would be doing what staff have been encouraging as a whole for quite some time and "jumping right in." They would become more cultured with the boards and experience first-hand the kind of discussion that goes on here before making a thread themselves. Of course, that's what people are supposed to do to begin with--but this implementation would directly ensure that. No one is being denied access of entire forums or features other than that one. They're still able to fully experience the site.

And, I'd rather they could not create new threads in the Suggestions & Feedback forum because then when we do encounter poor members, they would surely create annoying threads complaining about not being able to create threads elsewhere. I also feel that they should be acquainted with the site for at least a brief while before suggesting changes.

Anyway, I can't say I expect everyone to embrace this idea or for it to be put into practice. I simply remember the heavy debate that ensued the last time I created a thread in here--and that sort of thing I always enjoy. It's why I made this so public, actually. I think everyone should have a say in it. That method of thinking proves there's no elitist or unwelcoming way of thinking involved here.
[/size]

[Syk3]

*notices that all but one person who has posted ("It's brilliant") is a moderator*

Gotta love the publicity. :p

I agree that this very well may prevent some problems that the forums have always had, and other concerns that I noticed have already been addressed, so I'll get to the point of my post. This solution is likely to work best in areas that encourage thoughtful discussion and topics, such as Otaku Lounge, Anime Lounge, Play It, etc.

But with my area in particular, I don't see any problems with new members posting artwork that they have made, or more importantly, requesting artwork that they could use as their banner and avatar. If we do end up not allowing them to make threads for the first 50 posts, this may pose a problem if someone is not very good at graphics but would like something to put in their signature that they can call their own.

A potential solution that I can see would be to make a big sticky for newbies requesting artwork, but it would quickly become cluttered and possibly very confusing. Is it possible that you can leave certain forums to allow them to make new threads or is this out of the question in terms of actual options with the site? All or nothing, so to speak.

EDIT: And I'm sure I probably don't need to tell you this, but there are always exceptions to all of these bad threads. New members can make decent threads such as this one - [url="http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=45154"]Careers: What's more important to you?[/url] - without even reaching 10 posts. And if we deny these exceptions, then we may be limiting the full range and extent of possible discussions. I dunno, just something to think about.

[Shugo54]

[COLOR=Navy][FONT=Book Antiqua]Yes, that is a very good suggestion. But It has one major flaw. Dagger IX1 posted it. If I had to reach a certain number of post to be able to create my own threads and be respected I would be pissed. Most people dont have the kind of patience. If this plan goes through then most of the new members will become tired of waiting and leave the forum. I dont know the percentage but all i know is that there are less "Members" than "New Members" When I was a New Member I did not want to post because I knew I would never be as good as everyone else or post as much. I think that new members should be allowed to create their own threads. They should be treated with respect. It may seem like a good idea to most of the Moderators because they are known and are respected. Being a New Member is hard.I should know because I still kind of Am one. That is all I have to say. [/FONT] [/COLOR]

[Annie]

[color=darkslategray][size=1]I like this idea. But like Panda, I would be afraid of members just rushing through random threads just to get post count; developing no quality or structure. I personally know a few members I introduced to the OB, and when they understood the concept of post counts, I noticed their quality took a plunge into the carpet.

Then there is Syk3's area, that would be a hassle. Although, there still is the PM way. New members look around at threads, are able to post in exsisting threads, and they see who can/cannot do graphics. They can always PM a person. But we all know how the PM system goes; it doesn't, it usually ends up as spam. So I don't know.

If I were desperate enough for a banner or avatar, I'd PM someone who knows what they're doing (I've PMed Syk3 a few times). Then again, that's just me. I tend to use that "common sense" trait.[/color][/size]

[AzureWolf]

[FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue]While the idea sounds neat, I do have just one concern: what is going to stop the newbies who start annoying threads and introduction posts from going to random threads and posting, "OMG! WHY CANT I LIEK, TOTALLY CREATE THREADS TO SAY HI?!"

If I had to choose between having random, unrelated posts (along with mods' unrelated posts correcting members) in a thread, and just having separate spam threads, I would choose the latter.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[Syk3]

[QUOTE=Annalisse][color=darkslategray][size=1]Then there is Syk3's area, that would be a hassle. Although, there still is the PM way. New members look around at threads, are able to post in exsisting threads, and they see who can/cannot do graphics. They can always PM a person. But we all know how the PM system goes; it doesn't, it usually ends up as spam. So I don't know.

If I were desperate enough for a banner or avatar, I'd PM someone who knows what they're doing (I've PMed Syk3 a few times). Then again, that's just me. I tend to use that "common sense" trait.[/size][/color][/QUOTE]Well, that's the thing. When you get down to PMing, that narrows the request to one person. Most of the time, I imagine, the specific person may not have time or feel like making a banner and avatar set. The threads allow people to work to their own pace without being pressured into making someone a banner, which I can tell you first hand can be rather annoying, lol.

[Sol-Blade]

[SIZE=-3]At first glance, while this idea does seem very intriguing, and seemingly necessary (I kinda mouthed "Why didn't they think of this before?" when I read about it). But indeed, I wouldn't feel very motivated to even post, if I felt that I had to "earn" my privleges. If anyone has ever been to the INA forums, you know that you need 50 posts just to be able to have an avatar and custom title. Now while not being that restricting (It's just an avatar), it still feels that the only reason some people are 'compelled' to post, is to gain those things. They (They, meaning a few of them) just kinda half-*** their way through those 50 posts. Kinda annoying, but then again it make work here. But it does seem like a very good idea. You'd just have to take in the fact that, not all New Members make duplicate threads. The ones who *are* smart enough to read to rules will probably have the next 'hot' thread topic, but I'm sure they aren't going to be very happy to learn they have to wait to post it.[/SIZE]

[Kei]

[color=darkblue]I think that this can be a good idea, given all the pros already stated by other people in this thread, but perhaps not on a board-wide basis. In places such as Art Studio, where such problems and such don't arise nearly as often as they do in, say Otaku Lounge, I don't think it would be necessary. So perhaps implementing it in the more spam heavy forums would be better.[/color]

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]I think that this a great idea: It has the possibility to make a difference. But, if such a thing were to happen, rather than cutting down New Member post counts to 25, why not create a distinction between 0-25 and 25-50 posts? I think by the time you've made around 50 posts, you can be considered to be a fully fledged member. But I think that having a 50 post limit before thread creation is a good way to put people off OB. Therefore, a compromise is required.

Lets say that somebody posts, on average, 3 times a day. That means, it'd take just over a week to be able to post a thread at a 25+ post count. But, it would take around 2 and a half weeks at a 50+ post count. Which is more likely to intimidate New members? I remember when I first joined, the thought of actually breaking 50 [and then 100] posts seemed like an insurmountable task. So yeah, I think that 25 posts is around the acceptable limit so that a) Newbies now know whats up with the forums and b) they're not feeling excluded. And my support is also there for the disabling of duplicate replies as well. Great idea [if it is practisable].[/size]

[Solo Tremaine]

[color=#503f86]I think this idea's interesting- provisionally I'd say it's decent: 25 posts isn't anything special, but it won't much change the fact that if a new member still doesn't read the rules when they sign up anyway, their post quality may be just as bad and their posts are only going to cause disruption in existing threads rather than clean, new ones. I find that can be more frustrating personally, because as they aren't able to start a new thread to ask a question you're risking a whole string of unrelated replies that have to be deleted individually (especially if it's a seven-page thread- even the 'Delete Posts' option means ages of trawling through to get to the right ones).

It seems sound enough, but the problem's always going to be there if the rules aren't adhered to.[/color]

[James]

[color=#811C3A]I like this idea but I don't think it will change anything. A member with low-quality posts is a member with low-quality posts. I find that members tend to improve when they are encouraged directly by staff (so thread closures can actually have a benefit for members who are keen to participate, because they are reminded of what we require here).

The most this would do is cause some new members to simply give up and leave. But as Azure correctly pointed out, people who are going to create awful posts will do it one way or another -- if they aren't making threads, they'll just respond incoherently to existing threads.

I think you will find that most spam at OtakuBoards doesn't come from new threads/thread starters. Most of it can be found within existing threads, where people post very short or incoherent replies. Many of these posts are not deleted and they are harder to detect when they are sitting buried within the longer threads.

Our biggest challenge is to make the rules more comprehensive, easier to access and more noticeable. That is something that I am going to tackle with our next version change.

But other than that, I don't want to add further restrictions. OtakuBoards is, by default, a place that has certain standards. Some already view it as being an exclusive place. But I am always trying to encourage new members to participate and to have standards while also allowing for certain flexibililty and freedom where possible.

On a purely functional level, I don't think that this proposed change would impact the site positively. But also, as we are today, I think we are as restrictive as we are going to get for a long time. If we put further borders and boundaries in place, we may end up discouraging a lot of the members that we would rather attract.

I will say, though, that as our average membership age increases (as it's doing and as it will continue to do), there might be room for something like this. But right now I think it's critical to streamline what we have, rather than implement additional measures.[/color]

[Dagger]

[quote name='Charles']Any concerns about the forums appearing unwelcoming would hold water if the "Member" rank required a significant amount of posts to attain, but that's simply not the case. One could even argue that your logic is quite contradictory. I'd say that it can seem more unwelcoming, as you put it, to obtain a membership here, post a thread, let's say an introduction thread or a gay marriage thread and have it locked in view of everyone on the main topic listing. Even if it is done so in a friendly way. There's typically a number of normal members that group up within such threads and point out the mistake if staff aren't around discover it immediately, creating a feeling of alienation. Instantly, new members may feel that they've started off on the wrong foot and become discouraged. My measure would be a security blanket to prevent that from happening.[/quote]
I understand what you're saying here, and it makes sense, but to me it seems like the most straightforward solution would be warning the people who play mod (which is one of my pet peeves anyway, heh).

[quote]If the number of posts required for "Member" status were reduced to twenty-five, I'd hardly call that a[i]mass[/i]ing posts. The language there implies that they're being burdened with the task of enduring a long period of posting before being welcomed fully into the community.[/quote]
Eh... we may have to agree to disagree on this. Going by my personal experience, there are times when I've joined forums and only gotten to, say, twenty-five posts after months and months of being a member. Some people just prefer to lurk, only occasionally interjecting comments or really getting involved in a discussion--but often lurkers are the ones who make the best threads. That aside, I personally have a tendency to create more threads when I'm new to a forum than when I've been there for a while. Not having that ability would be sort of annoying.

[quote]And, I'd rather they could not create new threads in the Suggestions & Feedback forum because then when we do encounter poor members, they would surely create annoying threads complaining about not being able to create threads elsewhere. I also feel that they should be acquainted with the site for at least a brief while before suggesting changes.[/quote]
The thing is, I really think new members should be able to publicly ask questions. That's often the first thing I do when I sign up for a message board, assuming it has a section like this. For example, when I recently joined a different anime-related forum, before posting anything else I made a thread asking how to disable the default smilies in posts.

~Dagger~

[Charles]

Despite the issue being settled, I don't mind keeping the discussion going, if for nothing else to comment on the posts that have been made since I last visited. It's an interesting discussion, so I'm satisfied with that and the attention it's received.

[quote name='Syk3']...with my area in particular, I don't see any problems with new members posting artwork that they have made, or more importantly, requesting artwork that they could use as their banner and avatar. If we do end up not allowing them to make threads for the first 50 posts, this may pose a problem if someone is not very good at graphics but would like something to put in their signature that they can call their own.[/quote]I can see the merit in such a point, but at the same time I have to say that I disagree with you there. I must argue that the implementation of such a proposal would build character for new posters within that forum. They would be restricted to providing critiques and making a contribution to the forum as a whole before simply showing off their own work. It would be a positive thing, I say, to get them into that habit early. Also, I'm not sure if a person who does indeed have less than twenty-five posts [i]deserves[/i] the right to request artwork, such as banners and avatars. Wouldn't it, in fact, be easy for me to register, request a banner or avatar, and simply never return once my request has been addressed? An individual should have a proven committment to the site in general before benefitting from it in such a way.

[quote]EDIT: And I'm sure I probably don't need to tell you this, but there are always exceptions to all of these bad threads. New members can make decent threads such as this one - [url="http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=45154"]Careers: What's more important to you?[/url] - without even reaching 10 posts. And if we deny these exceptions, then we may be limiting the full range and extent of possible discussions. I dunno, just something to think about.[/QUOTE]Of course you don't need to tell me that; I've acknowledged the point already (if you've read my last post within this topic that is). Which, is why I'm suggesting such a low number of posts in exchange for the permission to create threads.

[quote name='Shugo54][color=#000080']It has one major flaw. Dagger IX1 posted it. If I had to reach a certain number of post to be able to create my own threads and be respected I would be pissed. Most people dont have the kind of patience. If this plan goes through then most of the new members will become tired of waiting and leave the forum. [/quote][/color]

And I addressed it. We're not talking about a "certain number of posts." On the contrary, we're referring to a very specific number of posts--twenty or twenty-five at the most. The issue in no way goes hand-in-hand with the attainment of respect. I'm in no way setting twenty posts as the measuring stick for respect because such an acceptance is in no way related to the number of threads someone makes. On the other hand, if someone doesn't have the patience to achieve a member rank at twenty or twenty-five posts, well then, they probably don't have much potential to begin with. If an older age range is what this site is trying to target, I'd say that discouraging such people from leaving is probably in line with its best interests.

[color=black][size=1][color=#2f4f4f][color=#000000][quote name='Annalisse][/color']I like this idea. But like Panda, I would be afraid of members just rushing through random threads just to get post count; developing no quality or structure. I personally know a few members I introduced to the OB, and when they understood the concept of post counts, I noticed their quality took a plunge into the carpet. [/quote][/color][/size][/color]

Surely, a positive way to identify a poor member and "nip the problem in the bud" before they ever get the chance to create a thread if that's the level of their post quality.

[size=2][color=#0000ff][color=#000000][quote name='AzureWolf][/color']While the idea sounds neat, I do have just one concern: what is going to stop the newbies who start annoying threads and introduction posts from going to random threads and posting, "OMG! WHY CANT I LIEK, TOTALLY CREATE THREADS TO SAY HI?!"[/quote][/color][/size]

[size=2][color=black]Well, yet again, if someone posts in such a way, there's the door. It's rather easy to prune or delete posts. I think that off-topic posts within threads, like the one mentioned above, would not only be easy enough to identify, but would also be insignificant in quanity compared to the threads created for the purpose of delivering the same message. It would take a real lack of common sense to post something like what you stated, compared to creating an actual introduction thread. It would be a sure-fire way of identifying those who wouldn't cut the mustard to begin with. [/color][/size]

[size=1][quote name='Sol-Blade']At first glance, while this idea does seem very intriguing, and seemingly necessary (I kinda mouthed "Why didn't they think of this before?" when I read about it). But indeed, I wouldn't feel very motivated to even post, if I felt that I had to "earn" my privleges. If anyone has ever been to the INA forums, you know that you need 50 posts just to be able to have an avatar and custom title. Now while not being that restricting (It's just an avatar), it still feels that the only reason some people are 'compelled' to post, is to gain those things. They (They, meaning a few of them) just kinda half-*** their way through those 50 posts. Kinda annoying, but then again it make work here. But it does seem like a very good idea. You'd just have to take in the fact that, not all New Members make duplicate threads. The ones who *are* smart enough to read to rules will probably have the next 'hot' thread topic, but I'm sure they aren't going to be very happy to learn they have to wait to post it.[/quote][/size]

[size=2]People keep on commenting as if twenty or so posts is such an unattainable goal to reach. There's not much to "earn." I don't know if you're aware of this, but for the majority of this site's history, members had to reach a level of posts much higher than what I'm suggesting, just to use a custom avatar. When I first joined, that number was 1,000 posts to be specific. Later, it was reduced to 500. I, along with many other members, didn't put in a "half-assed" effort, as you say, to reach that many posts. Nor was it the reason we kept posting. I remained here long after I was able to use a custom avatar obviously. The wait for these people to post their next "hot" thread topic isn't much of a wait at all either. I see it as a non-issue considering the incredibly insignificant criteria I'm suggesting.[/size]

[size=2]People keep referring to this as a restriction; I see it as an official tutorial. One that's tangible instead of an applied responsibility to just read the rules and automatically be cultured with the place enough to make a thread.[/size]

[size=2]Also, the ability to post threads will seem more important to people once they have it, if they feel that twenty or so posts is such an unbearable wait. They will be less likely to abuse it and create higher quality threads as a result, thus increasing the likelihood of the next "hot" thread topic you refer to.[/size]

[size=2][size=1][quote name='Baron Samedi']I think that this a great idea: It has the possibility to make a difference. But, if such a thing were to happen, rather than cutting down New Member post counts to 25, why not create a distinction between 0-25 and 25-50 posts? I think by the time you've made around 50 posts, you can be considered to be a fully fledged member. But I think that having a 50 post limit before thread creation is a good way to put people off OB. Therefore, a compromise is required.[/quote][/size][/size]

[size=2]I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Perhaps you misread me. There won't be a fifty post benchmark for thread creation. People will either become a "Member" after twenty to twenty-five posts, or still be considered a "New Member" but have the ability to create their own threads.[/size]

[color=#503f86][quote name='Solo Tremaine']I think this idea's interesting- provisionally I'd say it's decent: 25 posts isn't anything special, but it won't much change the fact that if a new member still doesn't read the rules when they sign up anyway, their post quality may be just as bad and their posts are only going to cause disruption in existing threads rather than clean, new ones. I find that can be more frustrating personally, because as they aren't able to start a new thread to ask a question you're risking a whole string of unrelated replies that have to be deleted individually (especially if it's a seven-page thread- even the 'Delete Posts' option means ages of trawling through to get to the right ones).[/quote][/color]

[size=2][color=black]You bring up a good point. And yet, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to browse through the Suggestions & Feedback forum or private message the staff in relation to simple questions. If they disrupt a thread with an abundance of posts, it would be rather easy to prune them. I'd say that such a problem would be related to the minority of new members though. Anyone with an inch of common sense should know better than to ask how to use an avatar or to say "Hello" within a politial discussion, for example. [/color][/size]

[size=2]Also, I'm sure there's a way to automatically dispatch private messages to members upon registration. The private message could explain the situation clearly and warn against such behavior. They're more likely to read that then the rules. [/size]

[size=2][color=#811c3a][quote name='James']I like this idea but I don't think it will change anything. A member with low-quality posts is a member with low-quality posts. I find that members tend to improve when they are encouraged directly by staff (so thread closures can actually have a benefit for members who are keen to participate, because they are reminded of what we require here).[/quote][/color][/size]

[size=2][color=black]Well, this isn't about automatically transforming a low-quality member into a high-quality one though. I agree that it won't change anyone in such a drastic way. This suggestion is meant to help introduce people to the site in a more curved way, however. They're still subject to encouragement from staff--but it will be at the cost of the alienation that accompanies the closure of what was intended to be a friendly albiet unnecessary gesture, like an introduction thread. Or a duplicate thread. If there were obvious, although marginal restrictions in place, it would also encourage people to read the rules more too--because they would want to know exactly what is going on. Also, instead of being reminded of what is required here, they would automatically be thrusted into exactly what it is that's required.[/color][/size]

[size=2][color=#811c3a][quote]The most this would do is cause some new members to simply give up and leave. But as Azure correctly pointed out, people who are going to create awful posts will do it one way or another -- if they aren't making threads, they'll just respond incoherently to existing threads.[/quote][/color][/size]

[size=2][color=black]Agreed. Azure brought up a valid point. [i]But, [/i]as I said to him--it would be best if those people left. If people who would create awful threads are just regulated to creating awful posts--one problem is automatically eliminated. The other is as simple as pruning their posts. Although this site is active, I don't think it's active so much that moderators should find it much of a hassle to locate off-topic or incoherent threads within their forums.[/color][/size]

[color=#811c3a][quote]Our biggest challenge is to make the rules more comprehensive, easier to access and more noticeable. That is something that I am going to tackle with our next version change.[/quote][/color]

[color=black]This would make them more noticeable; that's for sure. They would be imposed, in a very liberal way, directly onto people creating a very noticeable presense of the rule set in practice. I think that this idea would encourage people to read the rules or the automatic private message sent to them too.[/color]

The rest of your post, I can't argue with because it's your opinion and you're more qualified to discern whether or not something like this would be a good idea or not in practice, so I won't question that. I'm happy with the fact that it's open for future consideration at least.

[quote name='Dagger IX1']I understand what you're saying here, and it makes sense, but to me it seems like the most straightforward solution would be warning the people who play mod (which is one of my pet peeves anyway, heh).[/quote]But what does that do for the new member who has already felt the effects of isolation? You're accomplishing something by correcting the offending members, but I'm not sure it's anything that would encourage the member they scolded.

[quote]Eh... we may have to agree to disagree on this. Going by my personal experience, there are times when I've joined forums and only gotten to, say, twenty-five posts after months and months of being a member. Some people just prefer to lurk, only occasionally interjecting comments or really getting involved in a discussion--but often lurkers are the ones who make the best threads. That aside, I personally have a tendency to create more threads when I'm new to a forum than when I've been there for a while. Not having that ability would be sort of annoying.[/quote]Sounds good to me. I won't press this point for the purpose of forcing you to agree with me. Like I said to James above, there's a point where I respect personal opinion and just can't question it. I will say though, that after twenty posts, someone is still new at the forum, and a lurker, although not likely to create a thread because it would defy what they in fact are, still wouldn't have to exhibit a high level of participation to gain the right to make a thread.

[quote]The thing is, I really think new members should be able to publicly ask questions. That's often the first thing I do when I sign up for a message board, assuming it has a section like this. For example, when I recently joined a different anime-related forum, before posting anything else I made a thread asking how to disable the default smilies in posts.[/quote]Most of the questions that someone would ask upon first joining have already been answered and can be found by browsing through Suggestions & Feedback forum without creating a new thread. I think that it would eliminate redundency and encourage them to make use of the feature, which is required throughout the site. Otherwise, simple questions can always be addressed directly to the staff via private message.

Phew. I'd just like to thank everyone who replied whether they disagreed or not. That consideration and attention is good enough to make me happy Again, I'm not expecting this to be put into place in the near future or ever, for that matter but it's definitely fun to both discuss and consider these things.

[James]

[QUOTE=Charles]
[size=2][color=black]Agreed. Azure brought up a valid point. [i]But, [/i]as I said to him--it would be best if those people left. If people who would create awful threads are just regulated to creating awful posts--one problem is automatically eliminated. The other is as simple as pruning their posts. Although this site is active, I don't think it's active so much that moderators should find it much of a hassle to locate off-topic or incoherent threads within their forums.[/color][/size][/quote]

[color=#811C3A]The thing is though, I think a lot of spam in threads may go unnoticed. I mean, it already does. And threads are as easy to prune as posts, if not easier (because I think generally someone is likely to generate more spam posts than threads - when you ban someone, you will usually see that thread to post ratio).

But anyway, what I was going to say was that your idea about PMing the rules automatically is a great idea.

Perhaps we should create a brief PM that all new members receive as a welcome message, which includes the relevant links and brief advice. All new members would also have PM pop-up by default, which they could later turn off, so that this stuff would be 100% noticeable and unavoidable.

I think that is a great suggestion to come out of this thread; it directly relates to what I'd like to do.[/color]

[Sandy]

I sure am glad to be a full member of this board, because being a "newbie" would be just too darn hard these days. :smirk:

Just a passing thought...

[James]

[color=#334366]I think you're partly right, but let's not forget how spammy OB was in the past. All of these suggestions are made to keep people like yourself involved and to ward off people who seem to be the constant source of complaint from the majority of members (ie: people who post incoherent stuff that doesn't really add any value to the place).

So at the very least, I think these suggestions are coming from the right mindset/intentions.[/color]

[Charles]

[QUOTE=James][color=#811c3a]But anyway, what I was going to say was that your idea about PMing the rules automatically is a great idea.

Perhaps we should create a brief PM that all new members receive as a welcome message, which includes the relevant links and brief advice. All new members would also have PM pop-up by default, which they could later turn off, so that this stuff would be 100% noticeable and unavoidable.

I think that is a great suggestion to come out of this thread; it directly relates to what I'd like to do.[/color][/QUOTE]
Awesome. I'm glad something positive came out of all my rambling. lol

Which is why I think it's always cool to suggest something even if it'll bring about a lot of debate. Usually it's in that, that even more useful things come to light. It's funny how things work out. heh

[Zidargh]

Oh yes, a new type of Nazi oppression. (That wasn't sarcastic, I find this all very funny in how those twa--, di--, um, 'challenged members' are getting a kick in the ***, for it has been affecting OB for quite a while in my opinion.)

But just one thing, to those [b]members[/b] who are just posting here saying, "That's great, those 'n00bs' or 'newbies' can now stop saying; ." Are just as bad because it's not even helpful when saying your opinion. There are some 'n00bs' or whatever the hell you call them, who are pretty damn decent members.

Though don't get me wrong. This 'trial membership' kind of thing is a brilliant idea. It will definitely filter out the good from the bad.

Just an idea for James. With this PM thing, I think it would work if implemented correctly. I mean, let's be honest, when installing a game on your computer, do you really read the Terms and Conditions? I know I don't! I know where the boundaries and generally what is right and wrong so I don't bother.

Perhaps if you made the PM more eye catching with a bold, colourful banner, and something that seems [b]personalised[/b] to the member recieving the PM. Perhaps it could be programmed to say more than just "Welcome ."

It's a bit ambitious, but if people felt involved, I know it'd work.