Idea: New Member Post Limit to Create a Thread

[ljhlax]

I think I read posts for over a year before I started posting, and my first thread was one of the biggest threads I've ever started. I don't like the idea. The nice thing about having this community is we can easily decide what thought is a good one and what isn't, dismissing the bad threads quickly. Let the power of our communal voice speak...and by the way that doesn't mean being a **** on someone's thread. You don't like the thread, ignore it or be respectful. That is my opinion.

 

[CloneAggie]

We should create an upper limit too. At some point your opinions are well enough known that you no longer need to share them. We can guess what you really think without you actually posting. Now, what to make that cut off??? Just pulling a number arbitrarily out of my arse, I think 26,000 seems good.

 

[kilgore_trout]

In light of the recent mega-thread, a posts-per-thread limit may be more useful...

 

[Bigman38]

I propose that CF impose a 50-100 post limit before a member can create a new thread.

I have been a part of other forums that implement a rule where new members are not allowed to create threads until they have reached a certain number of posts, giving them a certain level of validity. I think that such a rule here could help clean up the content of the site. There are a lot of new users that join (which is fantastic) but may not understand message board etiquette or functions right away. They may not realize there is a search function, or that their 12-hour-old breaking news was actually already talked about when it was breaking news 12 hours ago. You can also shield from trolls and spam much easier this way as well, making life as a MOD easier as well.

What say ye?

*EDIT: isulive2train deserves some credit for mentioning this in another thread.

Is this even a substantial problem here? Seems like the mods are doing a pretty good job controlling the content(too good sometimes). Sounds like your trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist, or has such a small impact that it doesn't matter.

 

[isulive2train]

Just a thought I posted in a different thread. Looking for thoughts, not too serious about it. It just bugs me when new members named Paperclipman or whatever create threads for their first post. I'll hang up and listen.

 

[Ficklone02]

Things are fine the way they are.

 

[Cyclonepride]

We should create an upper limit too. At some point your opinions are well enough known that you no longer need to share them. We can guess what you really think without you actually posting. Now, what to make that cut off??? Just pulling a number arbitrarily out of my arse, I think 26,000 seems good.

:biglaugh: Well played, sir.

 

[bosco]

Also think of the Lake Bison type threads. Those would not be able to happen with these restrictions.

Exactly. If these kind of posts went away it would be the end of the world. Established posters wouldn't be able to let out their snarkiness and eventually they would cannibalize upon each other and become zombies.

 

[cstrunk]

Having been on this board for a while post count is not equal to post quality.

Agreed, but this will help weed out a bunch of rehashed threads, IMO. 100 posts may be too much, but 25 could be an acceptable limit.

 

[nj829]

I think it's fine like it is. Besides, how are we going to get our cheap high-quality jersey's?

 

[cstrunk]

I think it's fine like it is. Besides, how are we going to get our cheap high-quality jersey's?

Oh, snap! I forgot about that!!! :twitcy:

 

[JimDogRock]

This would be foolish.

 

[rholtgraves]

That's just unamerican

 

[ianoconnor]

Against it.

 

[pyrocyz]

So what about fans from other teams that want to have discussions about the up coming game. Sure there are a couple LakeBison's out there but there are also great people like the UCONN guy who wanted to know more about the team and what local beers he might be able to get.

Cyclonefanatic has always been a very open community of cyclone fans where anyone can partake and have their opinions heard. I would be disappointed if something like this happened.

 

[MattforState]

Who is making you read all these posts they don't want to read? If you have heard about the topic once, then see it as a new thread 12 hours later, why are you even opening it up?

Maybe we should have a post minimum for the 1st and 2nd responses to each thread. Then, when we see that a thread hasn't been responded to, we will know that it's not worth opening up. This seems like it would much more efficient.

 

[Alswelk]

Considering it took me a couple years to get up to the 100 post mark, I think it's a little unfair to go solely on post volume. I like the time-from-registration requirement. Also, some BBS software allows new users to only post new threads in particular sub-forums (i.e. the Introductions one), I'm not sure if this particular implementation is capable of that?

 

[Clone83]

No.

This too - the current degree - shall pass. There will always be some trolls and some inexperienced, seemingly unaware but obvious to everyone else oversights, by new posters.

Sometimes even the most experienced start new threads, etc., when there was no reason to, simply because people use the board differently. (And sometimes, granted, there is no excuse). Not everyone is on here 24 hours a day. I saw some sniping earlier regarding the mega-thread that didn't take such differences into account, that not everyone is going to know the current state of the situation.

Sure, people can and should politely point it out, and people should read what they can first. But not every situation called for a rebuke or face palm.

I know though what you are getting at.

The primary reason I oppose is if someone new truly has inside information, for example, or is even a parent or coach of a prospective recruit, I don't think they should have to jump through this hoop. I don't believe the benefits outweigh the costs.

And +1 and lol on the upper limit. Some I think need more self control. Repetitive points can truly drive other people away. Say your thing and understand that people got it the first time. Even if someone posts a counterpoint, the same can apply.

 

[crash_zone]

This is stupid. What if someone wants to sell their tickets, ask a question about the board, introduce themselves.

What if you have a parent or other family member of an athlete. Are you going to make exceptions for them or are you going to make them wait as well.

Maybe give new members permission to start new threads in the Ticket Exchange and Introduction forums?

 

[Mr Janny]

So what about fans from other teams that want to have discussions about the up coming game. Sure there are a couple LakeBison's out there but there are also great people like the UCONN guy who wanted to know more about the team and what local beers he might be able to get.

Cyclonefanatic has always been a very open community of cyclone fans where anyone can partake and have their opinions heard. I would be disappointed if something like this happened.

For the record, there are far more LakeBison's out there than there are posters like the UCONN guy. You just don't see most of them because their posts/threads get deleted as we see them.