Removing Certain Junior Member Posting Restrictions in the Gameroom

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Hullo folks
Firstly, sorry for the long title - I never was very good at abbreviations/cutting out unnecessary jargon and the such like

Anyhow, this has been something I've been sitting on since the huge Capo I mafia game in January last year (which many Junior Member, including myself, signed-up for).

What I was thinking of was the removal of the Junior Member inability to post in existing Gameroom threads. Their inability to create new threads would remain under my idea, although editing their posts could possibly be allowed since in many cases players may wish to hide any tactical slip-ups they have made.

The problem is that the current system undermines the entire ideology behind Junior Member to Member promotions. Joining and playing mafia games can be used as a method for Junior Members to bypass the "positive contribution" system. I must confess that I manipulated it at the time for this purpose.

Additional benefits also brought by my suggested change would involve less work for staff, and possibly more users actually deciding to join in with the Gameroom games - going through the process of PMing can be awkward for some newer forum users.

Another something I was thinking about is going all the way and dropping Junior Member status/restrictions all together - I do feel that it may be a little redundant. That, however, may be a little too drastic for now, so possibly could be a consideration in the future.

Thanks for reading

[Andres]

For what it's worth, I wouldn't mind Junior Members being able to post in the Gameroom.

Junior Members can post and edit posts in the mod sections, can't they?

Would this be possible for the Gameroom as well?

[caravel]

I thought there was talk about doing away with the Junior Member rank altogether? Any news on that?

Really though, this Junior Member rank is just putting off a lot of decent would be orgahs, I really do think it's about time we dropped it.

To the would be member the whole thing exudes exclusiveness, snobbery and shows the forum up as one that seeks to filter out "undesirables" as a priority. We're basically classing everyone as a would be trouble maker from the start: Guilty until proven innocent.

As I've said before, there are more than enough mods to deal with this and it's not as if we get trouble makers on a daily basis anyway. Junior Members have access to most of the forums now and if there was going to be any trouble there would have been already, so I don't see what all the fuss is about.

Removing the JM rank can only be a positive thing: More gameroom players, more diverse views in the backroom, more diverse frontroom threads etc, etc, etc.

[Quirinus]

But then again, it could also be a motivation for junior members to make posts of a higher quality. I know I consciously put more effort into my posts than I would otherwise have.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

But then again, it could also be a motivation for junior members to make posts of a higher quality. I know I consciously put more effort into my posts than I would otherwise have.

Although this could be considered a reason for the keeping of the status, it seems that nowadays every frequently posting Junior Member, with the exception of persistent trolls or suspicious appearing accounts, end up in the Member rank within at most three or four weeks.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being critical of the senior administration's judgement, but more of the fact that if practically all users will get there eventually, then it probably would be easier for everybody to simply allow them to skip the fairly punishing journey up to the higher rank.

[Quirinus]

Hmm.... I suppose that's true. Junior Members, for the most part, have no way of knowing though, if one is judging by the threads about "how to become a member". If the purpose of this segregation is to motivate new members to get into the habit of posting higher-quality posts, it would have achieved its purpose, right?

Or at least that's how I see it.

[caravel]

But then again, it could also be a motivation for junior members to make posts of a higher quality. I know I consciously put more effort into my posts than I would otherwise have.

To be honest, the fact that you see it like that does show how flawed the system is. It implies that you're a bad boy that needs a system to be in place in order for you to be incited to make half decent posts. This in itself is wrong and quite condescending.

It should not be about making quality posts for the first few days, in order to get promoted and then degenerating into spam for the rest of one's time here at the .org. Someone that appears and makes quality posts without incentive is worth one hundred of those that are only posting in a civil manner in order to be promoted to a higher rank.

I've seen this elsewhere. On a certain forum (not the .org) I've seen moderators and admins that seem to be of the highest calibre, conducting themselves in a most exemplary fashion, then meeting up on another forum using foul language and slagging off the members they hate the most at the forum they are moderating. What is the point in this if it's essentially fake?

[Quirinus]

I'm not saying that my posts would have been spam without this, but that different forums have different 'posting cultures', and expectations of what is considered acceptable, what is considered spam. This is one of the first forums I've been, for example, where posts of ten lines and above are, if not exactly the norm, very common. By making the granting of Member rights conditional, it (in theory) sets a point of reference against which forum behaviour can be judged (personally).

An analogous case would be speed limits on motorways. Even without speed limits, most of us won't be driving at 200kmph, but if the limit was set to, say, 90kmph, those drivers who might have otherwise driven at 120kmph or thereabouts know to adjust their driving speed. Hence the speed limit helps make the roads safer. Does implementing the speed limit imply that all drivers are bad drivers who need a system to be in place for them to drive even remotely safely? Not neccesarily.

[pevergreen]

I know myself, that the 300 second post delay for Junior Members was helpful.

You had to really think, "do i want to reply to this that much, is my input needed and helpful?"

You may just create another Omanes, and thats always a good thing!

[Geoffrey S]

I think the junior member system is there for a reason. At the very least it means they need to make at least a few meaningful posts to garner attention, and it's almost an introduction to the .org. In that sense, I think they shouldn't get immediate access to the Gameroom; if they're worth having in there they'll either be noticed sooner or later or someone will ask for them to be made full member.

[Beefy187]

What about instant membership if the person is introduced to org by other members?

[pevergreen]

Harder to implement methinks.

I find no fault in the current system.

[Csargo]

I think it would be a good idea to allow JM to post in the Gameroom, but still have to make positive contributions to the forum before they are promoted.

[caravel]

A lot of members will still be put off by being treated in this fashion. There are better ways to reward members for their contributions such as the HoF, Senior Member rank and staff promotions etc, etc. Labelling every new member as a potential troublemaker right from the start is simply asking for trouble.

A possible compromise solution would be to keep the rank but give unfettered access to all areas. The only restrictions could be the mailbox size and posting flood control. The edit button being a necessity. The fact that Junior Members don't have an edit facility and demoted troublemakers often have their edit facility removed, implies that Junior Members are all treated as potential spammers and troublemakers from the start.

Give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves, this is a better way to sort out the idiots than the current system.

As to being "noticed", why should one need to be noticed in order to be allowed to post in all areas? This come across as extremely pompous. I expect that a lot of potentially good members have been put off in the past through not being able to post in a particular thread. I doubt they sat there and thought "oh I need to prove myself worthy of the .org", it is more likely that they upped and left never to be heard from again. A lot of people don't have 24 hours per day to sit in front of a forum posting away at length in order to prove themselves, they just want to get straight into i.e. the backroom or the Monastery and make their first post about a subject they may be well versed in.

I've lost count of how many times I've been browsing an interesting thread in another forum and aimed to register there just to post a technical solution or a bit of info that would solve the problem, only to be hit by "you do not have permission blah blah blah...". Do I hang around there and post in other threads where I do have permission? No.

Unfortunately we will miss out on this because we're so scared of the "riff raff" getting in here and spoiling things.

[Geoffrey S]

I don't think it's a matter of fearing 'riff raff'. More of allowing potential members to find out if they fit in and prove that they have something to contribute. As an example, any (meaningful) student organization I can think of works with such systems: it gives both potential and current members the time to find out if someone fits in and get to know the faces they will be seeing more regularly.

[Caius]

What about instant membership if the person is introduced to org by other members?

I'm not sure if that would work. A good idea, but what happens if someone invites a new member, get promoted and starts to spam everywhere?

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I think the Junior Member system works quite well. The Org has had some problems with people trying to disrupt the forum before, but I don't think the JM status is meant to prevent that. I think the JM status serves more to help ease new members into the forum so they can learn the rules and contribute to the forum. This is different than excluding "undesirables" because in my opinion the aim is not to exclude people but acclimate them to the Org, which is far stricter than most of the forums I have visited and help new members receive guidance as to where to find what on the forum, and what sub-forums most interest them.

Sure the 1-3 week wait to become a full member may be inconvenient in some ways, but it really doesn't take very long to become a member, and so long as you play nice you won't be excluded.

I'd also like to say that I think the members spinning this as treating all new members as troublemakers and worthy of suspicion is way off base. Mods are no less courteous or helpful to JM's as they are to members.

[Ludens]

I've lost count of how many times I've been browsing an interesting thread in another forum and aimed to register there just to post a technical solution or a bit of info that would solve the problem, only to be hit by "you do not have permission blah blah blah...". Do I hang around there and post in other threads where I do have permission? No.

Unfortunately we will miss out on this because we're so scared of the "riff raff" getting in here and spoiling things.

I also think you are exaggerating the problem. For one, junior members have access to 26 of the 30 forums on the forum index, and many of those 26 have several subforums. Only the miscellaneous forums (minus the Watchtower) are off-limits, and since those are not TW-oriented they are not the first place where new members will go (excepting perhaps the Monastery).

[The Wandering Scholar]

I know i'm not but JM's could get fustrated with a large post count but having to wait untill the HOF is over to be promoted. How long will that be going on for?

[caravel]

I also think you are exaggerating the problem. For one, junior members have access to 26 of the 30 forums on the forum index, and many of those 26 have several subforums. Only the miscellaneous forums (minus the Watchtower) are off-limits, and since those are not TW-oriented they are not the first place where new members will go (excepting perhaps the Monastery).

Fair enough, I'll admit that it's not as restrictive as it was, but that's my point: Considering that JMs are no longer restricted to the watchtower is the JM rank still worthwhile? If you think it's still worthwhile for the posting restrictions then I would have to disagree on that for the reasons mentioned above. I still stick to my original argument. Most forums don't need this kind of system and survive very well, thrive even, without it.

[Quirinus]

A lot of members will still be put off by being treated in this fashion. There are better ways to reward members for their contributions such as the HoF, Senior Member rank and staff promotions etc, etc. Labelling every new member as a potential troublemaker right from the start is simply asking for trouble.

Here I disagree with you. Starting off new members as junior members, IMO, doesn't mean labelling every new member as a potential troublemaker, any more than having a moderator for a forum labels that particular forum as being spam-prone.

I do agree with the rest of your post though.

[Ludens]

Fair enough, I'll admit that it's not as restrictive as it was, but that's my point: Considering that JMs are no longer restricted to the watchtower is the JM rank still worthwhile? If you think it's still worthwhile for the posting restrictions then I would have to disagree on that for the reasons mentioned above. I still stick to my original argument. Most forums don't need this kind of system and survive very well, thrive even, without it.

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean we have to adopt it as well.

A reason for this system is that the non-accesible forums contain material that is more likely to cause trouble, for example heated discussions about certain countries in the Monastery and Backroom. By having new members get used to the friendly atmosphere here before allowing them access to those topics, we reduce the chance of flame-wars. It also prevents the forums from getting flooded with aggressive lobbyists (which has happened before, and in fact was the reason for the institution of the membership system).

Also, the junior-member rank makes new members have to wait longer in between posts, which is useful to deter spambots and other rapid posters.

[Caius]

I know i'm not but JM's could get fustrated with a large post count but having to wait untill the HOF is over to be promoted. How long will that be going on for?

When votations are gone.