Thread Starting Privileges

[Vaark]

Now that the season's under way, we're starting to see those trollish new threads popping up which either outright inflame or more cleverly provoke by the new poster pretending to be a fellow Fins fan. It's only going to get worse as the season progresses.

As a member of a number of different forums, I've observed that those with probationary membership policies are the ones which keep outright trollish mischief to a minimum. Specifically, the ones with a 20/20 or 30/30 (minimum # of posts/days as a member) requirement needed to lift probationary status, which includes the privilege of starting new threads, do at least a decent job of filtering out those who join just to be a nuisance.

If FH set up a 15/15 (days as member/min number of posts) requirement to start threads, we can at least sidestep the inflamatory posts of the most obvious trolls from teams we're playing in the upcoming 2 weeks.

If the new member is a legitimate Fin Fan, he/she will be here long beyond 15 days and in the meantime can voice their opinions and feelings on the myriad of existing threads covering everything down to Ross's hangnails.

Anyway, FWIW, that's my recommendation for keeping the main forum clean and focused.

 

[MoFinz]

good idea

 

[Chubby]

I second this, or third this, Is that even a word?
chubbs

 

[Nublar7]

Now that the season's under way, we're starting to see those trollish new threads popping up which either outright inflame or more cleverly provoke by the new poster pretending to be a fellow Fins fan. It's only going to get worse as the season progresses.

As a member of a number of different forums, I've observed that those with probationary membership policies are the ones which keep outright trollish mischief to a minimum. Specifically, the ones with a 20/20 or 30/30 (minimum # of posts/days as a member) requirement needed to lift probationary status, which includes the privilege of starting new threads, do at least a decent job of filtering out those who join just to be a nuisance.

If FH set up a 15/15 (days as member/min number of posts) requirement to start threads, we can at least sidestep the inflamatory posts of the most obvious trolls from teams we're playing in the upcoming 2 weeks.

If the new member is a legitimate Fin Fan, he/she will be here long beyond 15 days and in the meantime can voice their opinions and feelings on the myriad of existing threads covering everything down to Ross's hangnails.

Anyway, FWIW, that's my recommendation for keeping the main forum clean and focused.

We will consider this option. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Clipse]

Great idea Vaark. I second this as well.

 

[Ricky_Fan34]

I like the sound of this.

 

[TheDon74]

That's a great idea!

 

[R_t_Kraken]

That's entirely too low, make it a 100 posts and and/or a month as a member. But I like the idea, and would love for FH to eliminate some trolling.

 

[rainmaker1313]

sign me up!

I say 100 posts before you can start a topic and the topic needs to be approved by a Mod before posted until they reach 300 posts!

 

[ciscoholgate]

I have seen this on a Cardinals Forum. They made me wait for a week before I could start a thread. It is a great idea and the mods need to take it into serious consideration.

 

[DuderinoN703]

Good suggestion Vaark. I fourth this motion :hi5:

 

[Bumpus]

This might be the best idea that I've seen on here yet. :up:

 

[Bumpus]

Hmmm ...



After reflecting upon this concept, I've come to the following conclusion:

I don't believe that the criteria for creating new topics should rest upon a # of posts or a duration of membership. I feel that we (as a rational community) should institute an IQ requirement. If your IQ is less than 110 then you should not be allowed to create threads. If your IQ is less than 90 then you should not be allowed to respond to threads. If your IQ is less than 70 then you are a Jets fan ...

... You know, something like that.

 

[JCane]

I'd also like to recommend that a user's thread starting privileges be revoked should their reputation take a negative dip. Reputations could act as an Internet IQ. Your reputation is a direct reflection of who you are as a poster here at FinHeaven in the eyes of your peers. That is obvious. Most people who have terrible reputations are the people we are constantly hitting with infractions for the same reasons over and over.

 

[Vaark]

Hmmm ...



After reflecting upon this concept, I've come to the following conclusion:

I don't believe that the criteria for creating new topics should rest upon a # of posts or a duration of membership. I feel that we (as a rational community) should institute an IQ requirement. If your IQ is less than 110 then you should not be allowed to create threads. If your IQ is less than 90 then you should not be allowed to respond to threads. If your IQ is less than 70 then you are a Jets fan ...

... You know, something like that.

actually, this was but one of several recommendations I had in mind...but probably the most practical one for heads more level than mine.

Here's another one I wish could be instituted web-wide:

And here's a more permanent solution to keep out the pestiest intra-conference trolls:

Finally Bumpus, I do like posting here so I'd hope the powers that be can waive the 90 IQ requirement in consideration for all the past crappy graphics I've littered the site with!