|
Post by gooseberry on Oct 27, 2004 1:23:19 GMT -5
I would like to change my vote to "Require registration to read." I think it's a surefire way to shut the board down and I'm all for shutting down this board.
|
|
|
Post by sIsam on Oct 27, 2004 1:40:54 GMT -5
Let people read....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2004 2:03:48 GMT -5
I almost always go to my "favorites" list, push a button, and automatically am on the VT girls/women's VB forum. It is only when I try to reply to some posting and get an "error" notice that I register. I also have it set for "stay posted for 360 minutes" even tho I might only be there for 20 minutes. I don't understand why other posters sign in and out so frequently. Lots of times someone who has recently posted in not shown as being active. Why? [Obviously I am not that board-sophisticated.]
Anyway, you don't increase readership by having someone pay for it before they can see it. Registering is simply another way of having to pay.
|
|
|
Post by DiggUH on Oct 27, 2004 2:44:06 GMT -5
I've been to other forums where registration was required to both read and post, and I stopped going there because it seemed like too much trouble to go throught the registration process and I wasn't sure it was worth the trouble. On some boards where I could read, I ended up registering because the info I saw seemed interesting, and I became a part of that community.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Oct 27, 2004 3:19:21 GMT -5
I agree with everyone else. Registration should only be required to post. I'd hope that people would want to contribute but they shouldn't be forced to register just to read the posts. That concept might turn a lot of people off.
|
|
|
Post by cougarize on Oct 27, 2004 3:48:44 GMT -5
I am part of the vast majority that agrees with letting anybody read. Don't you hate it when you see links to certain newspaper articles, that you have to register in order to read the d a m n thing? I just want to click and read!
If people really want to participate they will register and articluate themselves. Forcing someone, who's never going to participate, to register isn't going to engender participation within that individual.
If you're looking for increased participation, that's a whole OTHER topic not related to registering to post. Methods to increase participation should be looked at in another thread.
|
|
|
Post by HuskerRed on Oct 27, 2004 8:42:45 GMT -5
Sometimes my best posts are when I keep my fingers off the keyboard and say nothing. Being logged on all the time would would make it too easy for me to say stupid things ... change that to MORE stupid things ;D I feel the same way as HuskerVBFan!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2004 9:24:10 GMT -5
I have chosen "other." I would like MY posts to be changed to a "pay-per-view" plan. I'm a little short of cash.
I will endeavor to make my posts entertaining, should this change take effect. But no promises.
I thank you for your support (and money).
That'll be $34.99.
|
|
|
Post by GauchoDon on Oct 27, 2004 10:47:27 GMT -5
I like it the way it is... I only log on to post (as stated by someone else above, it helps keep the stupid things I say to a minimum).
It would be a shame to require users to register and log in just to read as you'd lose many casual readers (some people don't like to register for things unless they know what their registration information is being used for or more importantly not being used for). Having to register to view would be offputting to newbies.
Changing to require registration to view would seem contrary to all the work Roger did to trim the registered user list too? (Is there actually a place where users can view the user list?)
And a more technical question/point: When you log in it has a time to stay logged in or something to that affect... Does that count as a "connection" (for the good old "too many connections" message) for the entire time listed there? If so then requiring registration would seem to make that message more likely.
And lastly why would we want to change it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2004 10:54:13 GMT -5
Changing to require registration to view would seem contrary to all the work Roger did to trim the registered user list too? (Is there actually a place where users can view the user list?) Top of the screen. "Members." volleytalk.proboards35.com/index.cgi?action=mlallThat'll be $34.95.
|
|
|
Post by GauchoDon on Oct 27, 2004 11:06:06 GMT -5
$34.95?? Time to find that ignore button
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 27, 2004 11:56:03 GMT -5
Here's a compromise suggestion: allow ALL users (whether registered or not) to read the main topics, but ONLY registered users can actually read the posts in each topic.
Confused?
Okay, here's a quickie explanation. Right now, the forum has the top most level, which displays all the boards -- women's, men's, faq, general, etc.
If you click on any of the board, you'll get to the second level. For example, if you click on women's, you'll get the women's vb board and the list of topics, such as "Arrogant Athletes," "UCLA/Pepperdine," and " (R) uffda!is a Geek."
If you click on the "Arrogant Athletes" thread, you'll get a long boring monologue by IdahoBoy® making a veiled complaint about Kim Glass. That's the third level.
My suggestion is to let registered users have access to eveything at all levels. Unregistered visitors can have access to only levels 1 and 2. So, they get to sample all the topics but can't get to read the meat of the posts contributing to those topics.
I personally favor keeping it the way it is, but I'm suggesting the above as a compromise.
Oh, if this forum becomes a pay site, the following will be true:
1. Many members will stop coming (to this forum, I mean); and
2. ModJoe's and Roger's vision of a volleyball world unencumbered by the real world's censorial and commercial leanings would have been destroyed in one fell swoop when the idiot (yet noble) Roger gave the forum to Odin, the evil nurse god.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2004 12:31:48 GMT -5
I am not Geek. I am Amenian.
Doof.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 27, 2004 12:45:32 GMT -5
I am not Geek. I am Amenian. Doof. That would be A Rmenian.
|
|
|
Post by islandgirl on Oct 27, 2004 12:54:55 GMT -5
lol Um, that was part of the joke. Geek. Amenian. Get it? Oh, never mind....
|
|