Ideas: Content visible only if you login/reply

**Maltz** · 05-01-2012, 16:46

Recently I noticed an increasing number of forums adapting a similar system: Valuable posts has restrictions attached at the judgement of the moderator. The user has to be a forum member in order to see the content. Even more restrictive posts requires the user to actually reply first for the selected content to become visible.

The former way is likely an approach to increase membership. People generally do not mind to register in a forum if they find a good number of quality works there. After people become members, they are more willing to post something. So we are essentially saleperson who comes in people's house - once they agree to let us in to do demo, they are more likely to buy that ultra-expensive knife set.

This is actually not a bad way to promote participation - if we actually have the quality works that justify this restrictive treatment. But the forum might be branded as "stingy", "secretive", or "not different from a door-to-door salesman".

The latter is actually a paradox - how do I know what to reply if I have not read the content? Naturally we will have threads that receive hundreds even thousands of replies and appears red hot, but maybe only 1% of the replies are actually meaningful, as the user bothered to go back to edit their originally meaingless reply to something more meaningful like "This is great work, thanks!" or "What a scam! * you!". The inventor of this strange system probably wants some way to seriously promote a post so it is constantly bumped to the top by curious users. But why can't they just make it a sticky is beyond my comprehension.

I am not suggesting that we should do those crazy things, but these are ideas that we can think of to encourage participation. Hiding an already open-content post would be evil, but we might be able to try it on new contents that the author may voluntariily agree to the terms as a well-intended experiment. We might be albe to increase some forum participation down the road this way.

What do you think?

**Husar** · 05-02-2012, 09:04

I'm ambiguous/undecided about the registration part.

Concerning the post to be made to see the content, I think it's that you have to have a postcount of one in general, not in that particular thread.
Whether that is useful in any way I'm not sure though, sounds a bit like an unnecessary hurdle.

**Andres** · 05-02-2012, 09:52

I must admit that I've been toying with the idea of making certain content visible for members only. I'm not sure. On the one hand, it may lead to more people register and the occasional post. On the other hand, it might also result in people looking at our site, not finding anything and leaving again. Or go to some other place where they can find similar information without the hassle of registering an account. While, if the content here would've been available, they might have signed up.

I don' tknow if it's technically possible to make content viewable partially. Take the frogbeastegg TW:S2 guide. I'm not sure if it's possible to make the first two chapters of it visible and require registration to read the rest. Genre "liked what you saw so far? Then register here to read the rest". Perhaps permanent links or articles on the frontpage or so.

How does the rest of the membership feels about this?

**Peasant Phill** · 05-02-2012, 11:56

It's a valuable suggestion, Maltz, but I'm against it.

We need more members, members usualy lurk before registering and if lurkers can't see anything 'valuable' I don't believe they will register.
Though please provide some examples of website who do use this so I can contact them. Perhaps I'm wrong.

**Catiline** · 05-02-2012, 14:20

having to log in to view content is a complete menace.

**Maltz** · 05-02-2012, 14:42

Is it possible to make an entire thread members only (or the first post of the thread)? Not logged in users will see the name of the thread, but when they click on it they get a message asking them to login.

I understand there are plenty of reasons maintaining the openness of information. But when I see there are 7 members and 200 unregistered users browsing the ORG, I see potential membership. If we can figure out some other way to increase registration...

**TinCow** · 05-02-2012, 22:09

Originally Posted by Maltz

Is it possible to make an entire thread members only (or the first post of the thread)? Not logged in users will see the name of the thread, but when they click on it they get a message asking them to login.

It's possible to do that for a specific forum, but not for a thread... at least not at the moment. If that was desired I could take a look to see if there was a way to add that feature.

**Kralizec** · 05-04-2012, 14:42

Personally I dislike having to register somewhere when I'm looking for something specific; I'd probably move on and see if there's some other place where you don't have to register that has the same content. Maybe that's just me, though.

**Maltz** · 05-04-2012, 15:06

I would do the same thing, too. Registering in a forum in order to view something is usually the last resort if the content is not available elsewhere.

It is hard to collect a wide range of premium works into a member-only forum as this would render the regular open-to-all forums incomplete.

If we can figure out why most users of the ORG do not register, maybe we can think of a better strategy of increase membership.

**Andres** · 05-04-2012, 21:34

Well, every day, we have people registering an account. Most people only make one or two posts, to ask a question and say thanks. What we, with "we" I mean the current membership, can do is welcoming those new people, talk to them, make them feel comfortable and at home. Even if you don't really know the answer to their question, you can still say something to them, to let them know this is a friendly community, e.g. something like "Hi X, I don't think I can help you with your problem, but I'll be here waiting with you until someone who does know the answer shows up. In the meanwhile, [ask a question à la "which TW games do you play"].

**edyzmedieval** · 05-04-2012, 22:08

In a way I agree with it, I mean it might work out to bring in more members and thus make this place more active.

But at the same time it's pretty clear that it might drive people away because they can't see the content.

**Montmorency** · 05-05-2012, 01:55

Of the several points I would like to raise, I will present two:

How many of these hundreds of Guests - 'nonRegs', as you might call them - are in fact members who are just having a quick browse and can't be bothered to log in?

The most members online over 24 hours was 681, 01-18-11 at 13:21.

**Visor** · 05-07-2012, 12:53

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Of the several points I would like to raise, I will present two:

How many of these hundreds of Guests - 'nonRegs', as you might call them - are in fact members who are just having a quick browse and can't be bothered to log in?

Quite a valid point.

I disagree with the logging in to see content/registering to see content idea.