Hey Everyone!
I'm going to suggest something, that some of you, or maybe the most of you might find redicilous at first: The removal of post counts. Why you ask? Here is my argument:
If someone made an account back in 2007 and never used it until let's say march 2009, then went ahead and wished good luck to all the sellers in the account market and gave free bumps, and posted totally redicilious, meaningless, thoughtless posts, should we call him trusted?
If someone has let's say about 30 posts instead of 500, but all those 30 posts are thoughtful, have ideas behind them, have a reason to be there, should he / she be less trusted?
Does Post Count help anyone determine anything? Because in my deep opinions someone who looks at post counts as a factor of trustworthyness, is someone who is completely undereducated in these kinds of situations.
EDIT: As finishing the thread another suggestion just popped into my mind: The removal of post count related ranks.
It is completely pointless, may confuse some people and often in cases, lead people to making the wrong decisions.
Now let me ask again, someone who has spammed together or posted 2500 pointless posts, should that person have the right to be having the rank of 'Grand Master' rather then someone who has posted 400 important, thoughtful posts, that are helpful to the community? I think not.
My other suggestion is:
I think the spamming rules should be taken way more seriously and should be punished more harshly.
Let's think about it for a while: A moderator goes - does his job -, warns or infracts a spammer whatsoever. Will this stop the spammer from future spammings? If a members intention is to gain post count regardless of the posts he has to make to gather them, he will.
What could we do about this? Well here is my suggestion:
Make the spamming rules more loose, only punishing real 100% spam with this, but the absolute spammers should be first infracted without a warning, on a second time a temporarly ban given, and on reoccuring bases permenant ban should be given.
How would the removal of post counts help this community?
It would make it a lot easier for all the naive newcomers or simple naive people who think that just because someone has many posts, all of them are meaningful and important, and therefore that member is trustable. It would stop all the needless spam and all the idiotic posts in this community.
How would the strickter spamming punishments help?
They would make the spammers think twice before spamming all the threads and flaming, thus giving a smaller chance to do it again.
Please read my opinion and state yours,
Thanks for your time.
I'm going to suggest something, that some of you, or maybe the most of you might find redicilous at first: The removal of post counts. Why you ask? Here is my argument:
If someone made an account back in 2007 and never used it until let's say march 2009, then went ahead and wished good luck to all the sellers in the account market and gave free bumps, and posted totally redicilious, meaningless, thoughtless posts, should we call him trusted?
If someone has let's say about 30 posts instead of 500, but all those 30 posts are thoughtful, have ideas behind them, have a reason to be there, should he / she be less trusted?
Does Post Count help anyone determine anything? Because in my deep opinions someone who looks at post counts as a factor of trustworthyness, is someone who is completely undereducated in these kinds of situations.
EDIT: As finishing the thread another suggestion just popped into my mind: The removal of post count related ranks.
It is completely pointless, may confuse some people and often in cases, lead people to making the wrong decisions.
Now let me ask again, someone who has spammed together or posted 2500 pointless posts, should that person have the right to be having the rank of 'Grand Master' rather then someone who has posted 400 important, thoughtful posts, that are helpful to the community? I think not.
My other suggestion is:
I think the spamming rules should be taken way more seriously and should be punished more harshly.
Let's think about it for a while: A moderator goes - does his job -, warns or infracts a spammer whatsoever. Will this stop the spammer from future spammings? If a members intention is to gain post count regardless of the posts he has to make to gather them, he will.
What could we do about this? Well here is my suggestion:
Make the spamming rules more loose, only punishing real 100% spam with this, but the absolute spammers should be first infracted without a warning, on a second time a temporarly ban given, and on reoccuring bases permenant ban should be given.
How would the removal of post counts help this community?
It would make it a lot easier for all the naive newcomers or simple naive people who think that just because someone has many posts, all of them are meaningful and important, and therefore that member is trustable. It would stop all the needless spam and all the idiotic posts in this community.
How would the strickter spamming punishments help?
They would make the spammers think twice before spamming all the threads and flaming, thus giving a smaller chance to do it again.
Please read my opinion and state yours,
Thanks for your time.
