Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Suggestion for rules change

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default Suggestion for rules change

    I got this idea because I received an infraction for multiple postings in succession. I made a post and then worked on a scripting issue for an hour or so and then posted a followup with other issues I found during my investigations into the code and then another shortly after that indicating I was going to post a working copy of the script with new instructions for it after I had resolved most of the issues with it.

    I didn't realize that multiple posts were such a serious infraction here. I've seen other sites have that rule of etiquette, but they don't actually penalize people for violating it. So I started to think why this site is different and why it's enforced so strictly and it seems obvious that the reason is because we have this requirement of a certain number of posts before you can become a Junior Member. We're essentially creating an incentive for people to make lots of useless, unproductive postings. In the thread I was posting in, for example, there were tons of posts from people saying how great the script was when the script wasn't even working.

    I think if you change this requirement, it will remove the incentive for people to make lots of stupid posts like that and clutter up the forums and the overall signal-to-noise ratio will be increased. Also, it will eliminate the need to constantly police this activity, saving moderators time to do more productive things. In fact, you wouldn't really need the rule at all. It would just become basic netiquette like it is on most sites. I'd like to see Junior Member status be granted more on the merit/quality of your posts rather than quantity. Have users submit links to a few examples of their posts after they've been on for at least a week and moderators can glance through them and give a thumbs up/down. If you want to save even more moderator time, perhaps evaluate potential Junior Members by endorsement of posts by other Junior (or higher) Members with the caveat that endorsers could receive infractions for endorsing a bunch of losers. Then it could be almost automatic.

    Just my 2 cents. Feel free to comment on or make modifications to this idea...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    5 Post(s)

    Default

    Nice Idea, Btw WOW, nice english

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    California, US
    Posts
    2,765
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    But if they do make stupid posts then there post count gets reset to 0. And it will continue doing so until banned or they make 10 USEFUL posts.

    And also, they still have access to the Free Scripts area..

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wednesday
    Posts
    2,446
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    I've always failed to see the point of the 10 posts, but just about everything else in your post doesn't apply at all to this site. There is a huge influx of people who want to purely leech scripts. If the admins didn't care, then they wouldn't have the Junior member status at all and just have it so new members can instantly access Jr Scripts, but then that encourages people to leech and not post at all. Although it takes heavy moderation, it is a much better system and I'm sure hundreds of useless members have been filtered out and thousands of leechers who were put off by the week wait.
    By reading this signature you agree that mixster is superior to you in each and every way except the bad ways but including the really bad ways.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    89
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps the best way to weed out the leachers isn't a post count, maybe time would be the best incentive. I believe most leachers would look on the forum, create an account real fast, leach a script and wouldn't come back. I highly doubt some ADD little 13 year old that needs his R$ B0T is going to wait a week or two in order to access the higher quality working scripts.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Copy pastin to my C#
    Posts
    3,788
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    29 Post(s)

    Default

    It is strict because you will gain a lot more than the worth of ten posts in the exchange when you become a Junior Member, if somebody cannot make ten quality posts for the amount of scripts they will gain access to, they don't need them.

    Next case.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    10,812
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    16 Post(s)

    Default

    There is an edit button, you know


    Send SMS messages using Simba
    Please do not send me a PM asking for help; I will not be able to help you! Post in a relevant thread or make your own! And always remember to search first!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hy71194 View Post
    There is an edit button, you know
    Yes, I know. Apparently, I should have used that based on the feedback I got from the moderator. It's just that most sites don't really make a big deal about whether you use the edit button or just post a followup. Since post count is a big deal here, using the edit button becomes a big deal, too. The other problem I have with editing instead of posting a followup is that it often gets things out of order and you end up replying to something later in the thread. Or is that OK? For example, this entire message I'm writing now could have been an edit to my original msg, but the message wouldn't make any sense all out of order.

    Oh, and thanks to the person who complimented my English. I'd normally reply separately, but I wouldn't want to be accused of double-posting.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Copy pastin to my C#
    Posts
    3,788
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    29 Post(s)

    Default

    Post Count isn't a big deal here, it's the space it takes and going by the rules.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South East England
    Posts
    2,906
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8 Post(s)

    Default

    Bah. I agree and disagree. I like the idea of banning useless posts, but, no offence to the mods or anything, I am generally pissed off with about a quater to a third of posts on this site being idiots saying "Nice script" or "I still dont get it" or my personal favorite "Proggy coming soon*2 weeks ago*"

    I think that something should be done to combat crap posts, but removing this rule isnt. And you got an infraction for double posting, not posting crap.
    Jus' Lurkin'

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,616
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tetazoo View Post
    Yes, I know. Apparently, I should have used that based on the feedback I got from the moderator. It's just that most sites don't really make a big deal about whether you use the edit button or just post a followup. Since post count is a big deal here, using the edit button becomes a big deal, too. The other problem I have with editing instead of posting a followup is that it often gets things out of order and you end up replying to something later in the thread. Or is that OK? For example, this entire message I'm writing now could have been an edit to my original msg, but the message wouldn't make any sense all out of order.

    Oh, and thanks to the person who complimented my English. I'd normally reply separately, but I wouldn't want to be accused of double-posting.
    Stop saying "most sites". Just because other sites are a certain way doesn't mean we can't be the complete opposite if we want to.

    You posted 3 times in a row when you could have used the edit button, and should have, to merge the posts. 2 posts in a row isn't an infraction, but is still against the rules. 3 posts in a row is excessive. If you're post was the most recent, and you have something to add, edit you're post and edit it.


    I've edited one of my posts before 10 times. Posting 10 times in a row on the same topic doesn't make a lot of sense when you could use the edit button.

    Stop being such a big baby about this. Just read the rules and follow them. Simple as that.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    No need to be harsh JAD although I see what you're saying. The rules are the way they are for a reason, and while you may have ideas on how to change them (which is good) be recommend having at least a bit more of a basis for those changes than you had.

    Thanks for trying to contribute to the forum, we do need people who take an interest in bettering the forum.
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,396
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ape View Post
    This sounds like a good idea. Perhaps the best way to weed out the leachers isn't a post count, maybe time would be the best incentive. I believe most leachers would look on the forum, create an account real fast, leach a script and wouldn't come back. I highly doubt some ADD little 13 year old that needs his R$ B0T is going to wait a week or two in order to access the higher quality working scripts.
    There IS a time limit. You have to wait one week AND get 10 useful posts to become a Jr. Member.

    When you say people are saying that it's a good script when it doesn't even work, that could be because it used to work, but now is outdated. Now, if recent posts are saying that, then yeah, there's a problem. (I'm not saying that 'Nice script' isn't spam, it is)

    I like the idea of having moderators accept the Jr. Members. We would need a few more moderators though. And we could require someone who wishes to see if they would be accepted PM a mod/admin.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,616
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Runescapian View Post
    There IS a time limit. You have to wait one week AND get 10 useful posts to become a Jr. Member.

    When you say people are saying that it's a good script when it doesn't even work, that could be because it used to work, but now is outdated. Now, if recent posts are saying that, then yeah, there's a problem. (I'm not saying that 'Nice script' isn't spam, it is)

    I like the idea of having moderators accept the Jr. Members. We would need a few more moderators though. And we could require someone who wishes to see if they would be accepted PM a mod/admin.
    Are you saying you think it'd be cool if registered users were made junior members manually? That just wouldn't be worth it for all the time wasted... And they wouldn't just make the whole forums moderators just for that.


    @Special ed, that went further than what you saw here (personal messaging).

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAD View Post
    Are you saying you think it'd be cool if registered users were made junior members manually? That just wouldn't be worth it for all the time wasted... And they wouldn't just make the whole forums moderators just for that.


    @Special ed, that went further than what you saw here (personal messaging).
    @JAD - Alright, I figured you had more of a reason but I wasn't sure.

    I think that JMembers are fine as is personally. There really is no effective solution that comes to mind when dealing with the "SPAM" created by people posting to get JMembers.
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Wouldnt it be better if it were linked to the SRL stats? Say, a weeks worth macroing will let you become a junior member? That way, they would be:

    A) Supporting the script writers by totting up the time on their scripts.
    B) Having to join up to SRL stats. (I admit, I used to just remove the piece of code which forced people to sign up... *slap on the wrist*)
    C) Increasing the macro community as well as the SRL community (Lots of people give up macroing when their account gets banned. More people, more pressure on Jagex, more people getting banned... but less likely chance of it being us individually =D)

    I, personally enjoy forums, and saw the scripts more as an added bonus. I would like to think that the forums could be kept clean, whilst the macroing levels kept high.

    There you go, my 2 cents also added... and with me being british, the exchange rate goes in my favour

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by splbooth View Post
    Wouldnt it be better if it were linked to the SRL stats? Say, a weeks worth macroing will let you become a junior member? That way, they would be:

    A) Supporting the script writers by totting up the time on their scripts.
    B) Having to join up to SRL stats. (I admit, I used to just remove the piece of code which forced people to sign up... *slap on the wrist*)
    C) Increasing the macro community as well as the SRL community (Lots of people give up macroing when their account gets banned. More people, more pressure on Jagex, more people getting banned... but less likely chance of it being us individually =D)

    I, personally enjoy forums, and saw the scripts more as an added bonus. I would like to think that the forums could be kept clean, whilst the macroing levels kept high.

    There you go, my 2 cents also added... and with me being british, the exchange rate goes in my favour
    No, I don't even run scripts often (less than once a month?) and I don't think I've even used SRL stats before. I still contribute to the community and I help people fix their code but I don't run scripts that often.

    Also increasing the macroing community is a bad thing, brings more attention to us (which we don't want) from Jagex. Also people using SRL shouldn't get banned if they auto-correctly so that disproves another theory of yours. Also if there are more people macroing Jagex will take more time to sniff out macroers banning people who wouldn't normally get banned.
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Also increasing the macroing community is a bad thing, brings more attention to us (which we don't want) from Jagex.
    I hate to say it, but I think that SRL is probably the main focus for Jagex in terms of macroing... Most of the attention that they focus will be on the largest macroing community, which I believe (correct me if im wrong) is this one.

    Also people using SRL shouldn't get banned if they auto-correctly so that disproves another theory of yours.
    I just got banned using SRL for less than half an hour, whereas people have run the exact same script for over 100 hours. In some cases, its all a matter of luck.

    Also if there are more people macroing Jagex will take more time to sniff out macroers banning people who wouldn't normally get banned.
    Heres my theory. If there are 100 people macroing at any given time (using SRL and using it properly), and jagex bans 10 of them... thats a 10% chance that the user could get banned.

    If there are 1000 people macroing at any given time, and Jagex are put under strain to ban twice as much, then thats only a 2% chance of us getting banned.

    Obviously, thats a watered down example... lots more people macro and lots more get banned, but the percentage should still hold true.

    No, I don't even run scripts often (less than once a month?) and I don't think I've even used SRL stats before. I still contribute to the community and I help people fix their code but I don't run scripts that often.
    Granted, and you must have been commended for the amount of time you spent helping others, hence that should be another way for people to become junior member... just like having to post a script will make you a full member. Not that im experienced, but I should imagine its hard to monitor whether 10 posts are actually useful. I could easily post 10 posts which are related to the topic, yet still a load of dribble.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by splbooth View Post
    Heres my theory. If there are 100 people macroing at any given time (using SRL and using it properly), and jagex bans 10 of them... thats a 10% chance that the user could get banned.

    If there are 1000 people macroing at any given time, and Jagex are put under strain to ban twice as much, then thats only a 2% chance of us getting banned.
    I think the assumptions and logic here are slightly off. We don't know how many people Jagex can ban in a given time period and we have to be careful about what assumptions we make about how that will relate to the number of macroers. I think we can assume, however, that macroing will get more attention as the percentage of runscapers macroing increases and that they will likely devote more resources to deal with it such as writing detection programs to analyze for patterns. Online poker sites, for example, have very sophisticated analysis tools to detect cheating and ban people for collusion and other offenses. We don't want that to happen here and I think the more macroing becomes a problem, the more likely it is to happen.

    On the other hand, giving the noobs flawed scripts so that they keep getting banned and keeping the good scripts under closer guard might help those with the good scripts. Essentially, that's how some drug running works (not from personal experience, of course). They'll pay some poor sap to carry a small amount of drugs through the airport (and either drop a dime on them or tell them to do/wear something that fits the profile of a "mule") to attract the attention of law enforcement so that the real runners with the bigger loads have a better chance of getting though without being detected. Kind of a cruel spin on it, but that's the only special situation where I think increasing the number of macroers makes sense. That wouldn't make it safer for macroers, in general.

    Final note: Be careful not to draw the conclusion that a lower percentage of total macroers getting caught each month means that you're less likely to get caught in that same time frame. That's not necessarily true. The probability that you get caught isn't necessarily highly correlated to the number of other people macroing. Like the poker example illustrates, it may turn out to be the opposite of what you think. The last thing we need is for Jagex to develop a sophisticated program to detect cheaters and it really wouldn't be all that difficult for them too do it. Then, we'd be constantly going back and forth with modifications to our scripts to avoid detection and they'd constantly do the same. That just creates a lot more work for us programmers when we could be using that time to create more and better scripts to do more things.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I doubt SRL is the main focus of Jagex, because if we were that large of a problem and Jagex wanted to we'd be long gone by now. There is a possibility that we are Jagex's #1 target but seeing as they've done basically nothing to stop us completely why change what we're doing if they're not bothering us?

    If you got banned for using SRL for less than a half an hour then you've got some serious issues. If you're using a good quality script and meeting all specifications and guidelines there is a very, very minuscule chance that you will be banned.

    So... if 100 people are macroing and Jagex bans 10% then, 10 people lose there accounts... but if 1000 people are macroing and Jagex bans another 10%, 100 people lose there accounts and Jagex has 900% more of a reason to shut down SRL.

    If SRL were to make 10 people a JMember a day then fine... that would be reasonable, but when there are 30 more people wanting to be JMember and complaining to us we can tell them it was splboons ingenious idea to have moderators evaluate JMembers. Moderators have lives outside of SRL too, and they have other jobs here as well that take up a lot of time.

    I'm not saying that suggesting ideas is bad, but why fix something that isn't broken? (unless you're blizzard, then fix it until it is broken).
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    80
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    tetazoo - I agree, we cant assume the likelyness of getting banned, which is why my example is only an example. We can however assume that they are limited to the resources they can acquire to stop macroers. Their press release stated that they got rid of RWT because they knew that macros were getting better, and eventually they would become undetectable... essentially, they tried to break "the loop".

    That, to me sounds like an act of desperation because they were afraid of being unable to tackle the problem, which is also why the updates were so extreme. More players = more testing = greater scripts = unbroken loop. All done through SRL (Or at least contributed).

    The last thing we need is for Jagex to develop a sophisticated program to detect cheaters and it really wouldn't be all that difficult for them too do it.
    According to what they have said in Rule 7 - Third party software, they already have a sophisticated system which records suspected macroers and gives the reports to the staff, who then analyse it.

    EDIT: I guess people arent in favour of my idea Oh well, was worth a shot

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Please don't take it that we shun new ideas, it's good to have people contribute their ideas although when ideas are presented to the public people find flaws or have new ideas. That the beauty, because when someone can't find a flaw we end up having the best solution.
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Special Ed View Post
    If you got banned for using SRL for less than a half an hour then you've got some serious issues. If you're using a good quality script and meeting all specifications and guidelines there is a very, very minuscule chance that you will be banned.
    I agree. There's luck and then there's skill. If you have a flawed scripts, then you're going to need luck to keep from getting banned. Some will have good luck and others won't. The better your script is, the less you need to rely on luck. If it's truly exceptional, then luck will be nearly irrelevant. The user that Special Ed was responding to obviously used a script that was easily detectable. The fact that someone else used the same script for 100 hours without getting caught does show that luck is a factor, but it doesn't show how much of a factor and my theory is that it is big factor for bad scripts and a small factor for good scripts. Any tool using the same method that SCAR does can theoretically be written well enough that it is totally undetectable with enough programming and processing power/speed because it's performing the same functions that a human does.

    Quote Originally Posted by Special Ed View Post
    I'm not saying that suggesting ideas is bad, but why fix something that isn't broken? (unless you're blizzard, then fix it until it is broken).
    Not sure whose idea you're referring to here, but my original idea was based on the fact that we're giving people an incentive (potential Jr Member status) to make posts and that is causing us to see more spam in the forums than we would get without that rule. I don't think anyone disagrees with my assertion that there are a lot of users out there making useless posts simply because we have this rule and that, if we take away that rule, we'll have fewer posts like that.

    My opinion is that, because we have a rule in place that essentially creates spam, the process is not ideal (call it broken or whatever). That doesn't necessarily mean that it needs to change. If all of the suggested cures are worse than the disease, then it's obviously best to simply leave it as it is until we figure out a cure that works.

    The whole point of my post was just to point out that one of our rules is causing unnecessary spam and to do a little brainstorming for ideas on what we could do to fix that problem. I also offered an idea to get the brainstorming process started. It has the benefit of reducing spam, but if the approval process is completely manual, then the time moderators save from having too police spam may be outweighed by the additional time required to approve users for Jr Member status. If that approval process could be more automated (I made some suggestions along those lines as well, but I don't know what all the out-of-box capabilities of this forum software are), then it may turn out to be a good way to reduce the amount of spam in these forums. Maybe there's functionality in this forum software that allows people to bump up the reputations of other users and we can just use that as a basis for Jr Member status instead. If that kind of feature is available, then it might even reduce the workload on moderators and users won't bother posting spam because they know that no one is going to bump their reps for posting garbage and will give a strong incentive for them to post messages that are as informative, helpful, and useful as possible. To me, that sounds like the ideal state we should strive to achieve.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    C:\Program Files\SCAR 2.03
    Posts
    1,194
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I was referring to both your idea and splbooths. The problem with using reputation to determine JMembers is the fact that people will start doing the "You rep me I rep you" thing and then they don't even have to make 10 constructive posts. I think what may work though, is if 5 SRL Members rep a Free Member then that free member will be granted JMembers. I think that if that was in addition to the 1 week wait I think it would solve a lot of problems. That would get people to try to get noticed and it would keep people from doing the whole "You rep me I rep you" because SRL members (should) be mature enough to only rep those that deserve it.
    [FONT="Garamond"][SIZE="3"]
    Yes, I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity. My crime is that of judging people by what they say and think, not what they look like. My crime is that of outsmarting you, something that you will never forgive me for.
    [/SIZE][/FONT][URL="http://www.villavu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=125"][IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/r1lzdv.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Special Ed View Post
    I was referring to both your idea and splbooths. The problem with using reputation to determine JMembers is the fact that people will start doing the "You rep me I rep you" thing and then they don't even have to make 10 constructive posts. I think what may work though, is if 5 SRL Members rep a Free Member then that free member will be granted JMembers. I think that if that was in addition to the 1 week wait I think it would solve a lot of problems. That would get people to try to get noticed and it would keep people from doing the whole "You rep me I rep you" because SRL members (should) be mature enough to only rep those that deserve it.
    I think you and I are in agreement here. This is essentially what I suggested near the end of my original post (having upper level members do the rep, not free members). If we happen to find a member endorsing a bunch of losers to Jr Mem status, you can deal with that member (temp/perm demote, warning, or whatever)...that's something else I alluded to at the end of my original post. If you ever wanted to have more control over the quality of new Jr Mems, this could easily be done by limiting the number of reps a member could give out per month/week/etc.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •