How about a vote?

Russ, let the subscribers vote on whether or not non-subscribers can post.

How about some more options for the vote?

* non-subscribers shouldn't be allowed to post.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be able to create new topics.
* non-subscribers should only be able to make one new topic and 10 posts each day.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be restricted at all.

I wouldn't want to exclude all non-subscribers from the forums, but some restrictions does seem necessary.

Originally posted by Svin1
How about some more options for the vote?

* non-subscribers shouldn't be allowed to post.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be able to create new topics.
* non-subscribers should only be able to make one new topic and 10 posts each day.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be restricted at all.

I wouldn't want to exclude all non-subscribers from the forums, but some restrictions does seem necessary.

All those options suit me for a vote as long as non-subscribers are barred from voting.

Originally posted by Delmer
Russ, let the subscribers vote on whether or not non-subscribers can post.

Russ why not act: voting is passing the buck
I would vote for a total ban on non subscribers, there is no point in imposing limits , of say 10 posts, as troublemakers will just get a new nic.

my compromise:

All posts by subscribers to be treated exactly as they are now:
eg. . only looked at by mods after alerts are raised.

All posts by non-subscribers to be looked at by mods BEFORE they appear in the forums. This gives those unwilling/unable to financially support the community the right to be heard, albeit on a slightly delayed basis.

If this needs more mods I for one will volunteer.

Originally posted by Svin1
How about some more options for the vote?

* non-subscribers shouldn't be allowed to post.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be able to create new topics.
* non-subscribers should only be able to make one new topic and 10 posts each day.
* non-subscribers shouldn't be restricted at all.

I wouldn't want to exclude all non-subscribers from the forums, but some restrictions does seem necessary.

I agree. Non-subscribers are restricted in the number of games they can play, so I don't see why they shouldn't also be restricted in the number of posts they can make. A limit of 10 posts a day seems very sensible.

I also think that subscribers should be limited. Nobody should be allowed to spam the forums with hundreds of posts. Ok, subscribers have more to lose, so are more likely to be deterred. But why take the risk?

Why not restrict subscribers to something like 50 posts per day?

Originally posted by David Tebb
I agree. Non-subscribers are restricted in the number of games they can play, so I don't see why they shouldn't also be restricted in the number of posts they can make. A limit of 10 posts a day seems very sensible.

I also think th ...[text shortened]...
Why not restrict subscribers to something like 50 posts per day?

I'd welcome the minimum number of moves before all forums are opened up. Initially, I'd see how it went with newbs just being able to post in Help and Meet Opponents. See how that goes.

The minimum number of moves shouldn't be too high, because the normal newbies shouldn't be affected too much due to a few idiots.

Neither, should it be too low. If it was say 10 moves, then a spammer could start 6 games, and have 10 moves in no time. Then after the spamming, that's 6 games which are going to be abandoned, which can adversely affect the site as well. Also, it seems some malicious people are willing to put some time into their spamming, like that idiot phantom accuser. So the number of moves shouldn't be attainable in 1 day of normal play.

I think a total forum ban on 0 games/0 moves users should be introduced. That shouldn't adversely affect any user who comes to the site with good intentions, and it might deter some of the more mindless spammers, like ICDutch.

D

[EDIT] I know the existing mod system works well as spam/malicious posts don't stay long, but it depends on users following around the spammer alerting posts. Why should subscribers be inconvenienced before the spammers?

Don't you like us?

All this talk of restrictions is ridiculous. Hell, maybe more than 50 posts a day means the person is spamming, so try to stop that, but let's not get too restrictive, especially on the subscribers.

Hell, I only started posting when I had about 600 odd moves. I saw how great the site and people here were and then decided to subscribe.

This is the type of solution I would back:

0-100 moves -> 10 posts a day in the MO and Help forums. This is about 4 games, should be fine.
101-200 moves -> 10 posts a day in all forums.
201+ moves -> unrestricted.

This should count for all users. Not just non-subscribers.
Too many restrictions on posting might chase away more new subscribers than it helps keep current people here.

Scenario:
If there are 4/5 threads I might be following, that means I might actually get to 50 posts in a day. In reality I don't usually post that much, but I did post more regularly in the past.
Now I'm suddenly blocked from further discussion because I've reached my 50 (or whatever) post limit.
Ludicrous!

The forums are a place to talk and exchange ideas. Let's keep it that way.