Suggestion: Earn Posting Rights?

[Pingu]

First off, let me say that I did post this in the "Ideas for Newgrounds' Evolution Mk2" topic.

I'm posting this here as well to give it more exposure to opinion by the BBS users who may not post in any forums except General.

My suggestion is as follows:

Make users EARN the right to post

Reason I say this: the overall quality of BBS posting is going down faster than a snowman in the desert...

Any new user can shit out un-funny/already been done/spam topic 4 times per day.

I recommend making a system to force users to learn how to be good posters. In order to get to the current 4 topics per day, 30 replies per topic per 30 minutes, maybe have a scaling system:

System Layout:
* minimum 2 days of lurking before being able to post
* 0-499 posts: 1 new topic per day; 2 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*500-999 posts: 2 new topics per day; 3 posts per topic per 30 minutes
*1000+ posts: 4 new topics per day; 4 posts per topic per 30 minutes

<>
"That's not fair to new users" you say. Well, thats true, but the kind of posters we want on the BBS are those that can think before they post "loln00b" as a reply to a topic. Users that can put effort into making a new topic (like seeing if it's been done recently).

One right-off-the-bat advantage is that it limits the spamming capability of your everyday Troll or Alt account.

<>
I'd like to know what people think about this idea. All suggestions welcome. Just try to keep yourselves civilized...

Plus, you all know that you wish something like this was in place...

[Pingu]

At 11/16/06 03:18 PM, Peregrinus wrote: 4 replies per topic per 30 minutes

Fixed

[Cosmonautical]

Well, the lurking thing would probably stop most alts.

And having to earn the right to make more threads would probably sort out alot of crap on the BBS, but I don't agree with the posts per 30 minutes thing.

I think that should be 4 posts for all users. It could just get annoying otherwise, as they'd still have to say the same ammount as any other user.

The rest is a good idea though.

[SunChipsClock]

Someone with some fucking brains for once. YES. This is the best idea yet. I'm sick of this place looking like the Reverse Republic forums.

[EtchASketchClock]

I never heard of such an idea before.
I swear.

[WilliWowza]

How about we just ban people who act like retards?

In fact we already do for the most part, I'd say the BBS is fairly well maintained for the most part, we don't need any drastic measures to try and stop idiots posting, because they always will, even with their 2 posts per topic.

[SunChipsClock]

At 11/16/06 03:27 PM, WilliWowza wrote: How about we just ban people who act like retards?

In fact we already do for the most part, I'd say the BBS is fairly well maintained for the most part, we don't need any drastic measures to try and stop idiots posting, because they always will, even with their 2 posts per topic.

But there's too many of the idiots, they need to be filtered out SOMEHOW.

Maybe the rules on not being a complete moron and atleast forming proper sentences could be enforced abit more.

[Pingu]

At 11/16/06 03:27 PM, MrMonopoly wrote: I never heard of such an idea before.
I swear.

Instead of being sarcastic, show where it's been suggested before. I'm sure it has, but I'd like to see that person's argument.

At 11/16/06 03:27 PM, WilliWowza wrote: How about we just ban people who act like retards?
In fact we already do for the most part, I'd say the BBS is fairly well maintained for the most part, we don't need any drastic measures to try and stop idiots posting, because they always will, even with their 2 posts per topic.

Oh, I'm not complaining about the work done by the mods. I'm just putting a suggestion forward that may help them to do their job (by limiting the capabilities of spammers and annoying alts).

[Jerkapotamus]

At 11/16/06 03:18 PM, Peregrinus wrote: "That's not fair to new users" you say. Well, thats true, but the kind of posters we want on the BBS are those that can think before they post "loln00b" as a reply to a topic. Users that can put effort into making a new topic (like seeing if it's been done recently).

You're punishing everyone as opposed to just the ones who are making the bad topics.

I say we implement a system where a select group of proven "good" users have the ability to ban users who do no adhere to the rules and lock/delete topics. They can be picked by the admins and members of the existing group or something.

[Myst]

Hum, you know, no matter if an idea is good or not, putting such changes on that kind of website means a lot of programming, and until it drastically improve the situation, chances are the admins won't consider changing anything, especially something that big.

So I think your best bet is to pick just one of your many propositions and try to make it pass. Bit by bit you'll end up passing your ideas if they're worth it, but saddly, it's very hard to come with an idea good enough to generate changes on a website this wide.

So, if I was you, I'd stick with the "force x days of lurking before posting" stuff, as it would drastically lower the alt spam. However, you do as you wish ...

[Pingu]

At 11/16/06 03:32 PM, Jerkapotomus wrote: You're punishing everyone as opposed to just the ones who are making the bad topics.

I was waiting for someone to say that. That is indeed the downside to the system. Abuse has changed many other aspects of Newgrounds, such as the ability to see the score of under judgment portal submissions.

I say we implement a system where a select group of proven "good" users have the ability to ban users who do no adhere to the rules and lock/delete topics. They can be picked by the admins and members of the existing group or something.

So basically, more mods?

At 11/16/06 03:37 PM, Myst wrote: Hum, you know, no matter if an idea is good or not, putting such changes on that kind of website means a lot of programming

I know.

So I think your best bet is to pick just one of your many propositions and try to make it pass. Bit by bit you'll end up passing your ideas if they're worth it, but saddly, it's very hard to come with an idea good enough to generate changes on a website this wide.

You can never get unanimous consent.

So, if I was you, I'd stick with the "force x days of lurking before posting" stuff, as it would drastically lower the alt spam. However, you do as you wish ...

My will isn't the final word, which is why I made the suggestion. I like to see what others think about something.

If the admins were to consider the option of the changes, I'd hope that they'd do the same and get opinions of general users.

[HaveUbeenFooFighting]

Dumb idea, IMO. Theres some good flash makers and intelligent people with less then 1,000 posts. Overall it wouldnt work.

[OneWhoListens]

Not all noobs post only bad/annoyinh stuff.
And some high-up users still have low numbers of posts.

[Jerkapotamus]

At 11/16/06 03:42 PM, Peregrinus wrote: So basically, more mods?

No, there are enough mods already. I was saying that the current system works fine.

[Pingu]

At 11/16/06 03:44 PM, HaveUbeenFooFighting wrote: Dumb idea, IMO. Theres some good flash makers and intelligent people with less then 1,000 posts.

Thats true, but it's not like they aren't allowed to post. Like site affiliates, I'm sure individuals who have proven themselves to be good posters could be given exemption. Again, it's really more of a study to see what people think about the idea.

[GrimmJimmy]

I support this idea, now all we need is sig pic's to show it

[SunChipsClock]

I'd say the best idea would to just add a General forum for the more....mature and established members of the BBS Community. A place where we/they wouldn't be bothered by constant "i need girl help" or "omfg Wii > PS3" threads.

[Paranoia]

Quit being so melodramatic! It's a forum! It's not like bad threads are hurting anyone.

The best solution to this would be to just let people know not to fucking post in threads that they don't like. That way, threads which people though were good or funny would stay bumped and the ones which suck will just wither and die. Democracy rules.

[0peth]

These might rules might be in your favor.

Nah.

[Jose]

Or we could just ban people who spam for longer periods of time.
I sick of these people getting a three day ban when they make a spam topic. Make it a two week minimum. Maybe then they'll catch a clue.

[SunChipsClock]

At 11/16/06 03:52 PM, Paranoia wrote: Quit being so melodramatic! It's a forum! It's not like bad threads are hurting anyone.

The best solution to this would be to just let people know not to fucking post in threads that they don't like. That way, threads which people though were good or funny would stay bumped and the ones which suck will just wither and die. Democracy rules.

The point is we have to go through the trouble of reading them to actually know that they're crap threads. THATS THE PROBLEM. That wouldn't solve anything.

[Purple-Slurpie]

I think everything... But over 2000 should be able to have 5 replies per 1/2 hour.

I like the lurking idea except for one thing.

How many hours would you consider "2 days?"
Put a specific amount of hours so that you can't just log on and then log off, then that counts as a day. like 5 hours of lurking. That sounds good.

[MrAngel]

What about the users who don't have high post counts because they only post if they have something worthwhile to say, and don't spam. I admit my first posts were on liners, but they weren't spam. At least not in the people I talked to's eyes.

[SunChipsClock]

At 11/16/06 03:57 PM, ILoveToYiff wrote: What about the users who don't have high post counts because they only post if they have something worthwhile to say, and don't spam. I admit my first posts were on liners, but they weren't spam. At least not in the people I talked to's eyes.

It's not just spam...it's talking about shit nobody gives a fuck about.

[HaveUbeenFooFighting]

Thats true, but it's not like they aren't allowed to post. Like site affiliates, I'm sure individuals who have proven themselves to be good posters could be given exemption. Again, it's really more of a study to see what people think about the idea.

Do you know how much programming this would require???!

[absent]

So, essentially, post levels.

By introducing rewards or more permissions for specific number of posts, you allow people to target those post numbers. This leads to people spamming or to post without any effort in an attempt to get higher in post count, and unlock these permissions.

Also, not everyone with 1000 posts is going to suddenly be intelligent. Limiting the posting of new users won't necessarily crack down on "crap" threads.

There's a much simpler way to deal with the problem - ban users that suck, make shit posts, or spam. Oh wait, that's why we have a moderation system.

[tekcos]

loln00b!!!@$#!@#%!

jk, I don't come to the BBS that often. But when I do, I enjoy my freedom. Anything limiting might drive me away. I don't think Newgrounds is about limiting people.

Stupid people don't really bother me, i've just learned to live with them. You idea is good, but everything is already taken care of by are moderators. No need for the change.

[SunChipsClock]

At 11/16/06 04:03 PM, absent wrote: So, essentially, post levels.

There's a much simpler way to deal with the problem - ban users that suck, make shit posts, or spam. Oh wait, that's why we have a moderation system.

Oh wait? And thats why this place is full to the brim of "experience challenged" people.

[Pingu]

At 11/16/06 03:54 PM, Purple-Slurpie wrote: I think everything... But over 2000 should be able to have 5 replies per 1/2 hour.

I'm fine with the replies per topic staying at 4/30

I like the lurking idea except for one thing.
How many hours would you consider "2 days?"
Put a specific amount of hours so that you can't just log on and then log off, then that counts as a day. like 5 hours of lurking. That sounds good.

Thats what I mean. But in order to be effective (you could just leave the browser open), have something programmed where you actually need to do more than leave one page open (like max 15 minutes before it stops counting as lurking) until the user visits another page. Probably complex coding though.

At 11/16/06 04:00 PM, HaveUbeenFooFighting wrote: Do you know how much programming this would require???!

Oh, I know coding it would be hard as hell. At this point, I just want to see people's thoughts on the matter of posting limitations for new members, even if it's not a specific limit mentioned in the first post. Limiting the abilities of new users in general until they can learn about how things work.

Another idea (instead of forced lurking etc) would be to have new users to the BBS be directed to a hardcore FAQ with info on how to make a good reply, good/interesting topic, the BBS rules, etc.

Sure, the BBS rules give a general outline, but currently if you want to post for the first time, all you need to do is check a box saying you've read the rules. FORCING new posters to read through the rules and FAQ before posting (instead of just clicking "i agree" at the bottom of their first post) may help educate new users before they make mistakes.

[TurtleJuice]

Isn't your idea of having to spend time struggling to gain a high post count and having to lurk for a while offputting to people who are new to the BBS?