• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

GIM2 Membership and Registration Ideas

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#1
One of the things that I thought could have been handled better at the original site was the way registration is handled.

Open registration obviously became a problem which is why the mods decided have a randon 'seasonal' registration.

I think that worked ok but what I found is that members would get banned and then when the 1 day registration would open up, they would create multiple sock puppets and continue behaving in the same manner that got them banned before.

I have some new ideas and wouild like some feedback from everyone.

Keep registration closed and if people want to join the forum, they can send a request and be invited. They other way would be by invite. However if you constantly vouch for people who act like jackasses all the time, you should be held accountable in some way.

I think this combination will allow for good members to join (all they would have to do is request to sign up) and it would weed out a lot of the spammers and troublemakers.

I also don't really like the idea of permanent bans...at least not on the first strike. I think bans should be incremental. First offense - 1 day. Second offense - 1 week. Third offense - 1 month. If there is a fourth offense - then maybe make it permanent.

I'm not a mod here, obviously, so I know it's not my choice to make. I'm just thowing out ideas that I think would make GIM2 better than the original in certain aspects.

Membership should be more selctive and at the same time we shouldn't be so quick to toss them out forever - especially when they will just come right back under a new handle.

It would keep the board more honest and we could get to know each other better rather than having pretenders constantly coming back and acting like they are somebody completely new to GIM.
 

skyvike

Gold Chaser
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
2,016
Likes
1,288
#2
Thanks, JP, for your thoughts.

Your idea about members vouching for new members bears examination. The actual mechanics of it is beyond my exhausted mind at the moment so I'll leave that for another time.

Originally, we were loathe to ban anyone on the original site, the arbitrary bannings at gold-eagle being one of the main reasons for starting GIM in the first place. We never really had a structure to the moderating on that site, with each mod given a sort of "roving commission" and seldom second-guessed by other mods. It led to the inevitable (and unavoidable, I think) inconsistency in application that so many people didn't like.

We have expanded the interpretations of the three rules to make things more clear for members and are working on some guidelines for mods. It's a work in progress, to say the least, but we have come to an agreement to make permanent bans a group decision. I'm hoping we can come up with a graduated system for meting out warnings and short suspensions (never liked "ban" to describe short time outs).

We are trying to make it the "kindler, gentler" GIM, which is not always easy, I can tell you.

We are trying to make it better.

;-)
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#3
Thanks, JP, for your thoughts.

Your idea about members vouching for new members bears examination. The actual mechanics of it is beyond my exhausted mind at the moment so I'll leave that for another time.

Originally, we were loathe to ban anyone on the original site, the arbitrary bannings at gold-eagle being one of the main reasons for starting GIM in the first place. We never really had a structure to the moderating on that site, with each mod given a sort of "roving commission" and seldom second-guessed by other mods. It led to the inevitable (and unavoidable, I think) inconsistency in application that so many people didn't like.

We have expanded the interpretations of the three rules to make things more clear for members and are working on some guidelines for mods. It's a work in progress, to say the least, but we have come to an agreement to make permanent bans a group decision. I'm hoping we can come up with a graduated system for meting out warnings and short suspensions (never liked "ban" to describe short time outs).

We are trying to make it the "kindler, gentler" GIM, which is not always easy, I can tell you.

We are trying to make it better.

;-)
I don't necessarily think we need a "kindler, gentler" GIM, I would just like to see it more fine tuned. In other words, instead of having 1,000 names in the member list, an assortment of which are banned and others being active "multiples", I would rather have a list of 100 REAL members. On the same token however, I think that permanently banning somebody would have to requisitie a pretty serious offense and should be a unanimous or at least 2/3 majority decision (like Senate approval on a Constitutional amendment). ;>)

As for the referral system, I just think that would bring better poeple to the forum bacause somebody elses reputation, other than their anonymous own, is on the line.

Maybe I'm just translating how I am outside of GIM onto the forum. I prefer to have a handful of good close friends who stand the test of time rather than a whole bunch of random acquaintances who come and go over time.

I'm sure you guys will do what you think is best. I'm just trying to pitch some ideas that I think might make the place better.

This IS the rebuilding fase, after all and I plan to stick around...
 

specsaregood

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
884
Likes
639
#4
The problem with the reference-only way is you end up with even more of an echo chamber. The new blood without any existing associations helps grow the overall POV and growth in new experiences shared.

And application process might be interesting. We've heard it many times, "I've been reading GIM for months but couldnt' get in because registration was closed and it really sucked not being able to be part of the conversation" So maybe giving people an opportunity to apply for membership in some way outside the general "everybody welcome" registration window....
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#5
Right..

My idea for registration is two fold.

1. Member invite, anytime. If you are member in good standing and you vouch for somebody, he/she is in.

2. Closed registration but application welcome anytime. So if somebody is reading the site and wants to join, they can click on a link that will send a member request to the mods. The mods can review the applicant using whatever parameters they want to use and the person can join.

This would eliminate having random windows where people just flock to get in and sign up multiple times so they have "extras" to use when they will eventually get banned...again.
 

specsaregood

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
884
Likes
639
#6
I don't think we want to add any more work to the mods though. But maybe a "membership applied" subforum that only registered members can see? With each "application" being an OP of its own thread and getting a poll of its own? Mob rule....er a "Democracy" of sorts.
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#7
I don't think we want to add any more work to the mods though. But maybe a "membership applied" subforum that only registered members can see? With each "application" being an OP of its own thread and getting a poll of its own? Mob rule....er a "Democracy" of sorts.
I'm not sure how that would work. I don't think membership should be poll based because that could easily turn into more of a popularity contest....especially if users have multiple sockpuppets like they did before.

I just think that with less permanent bans, there would be less users with multiple sockpuppets. Less multiples means better control of the integrity of the forum.
 

Scorpio

Скорпион
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
24,867
Likes
28,108
#8
You guys bring up some good points of which I agree with,

I too did not like the random opens, created confusion,

and yes, we need a constant influx of members for new ideas/thoughts/contributions,

otherwise it will wither on the vine,

S
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
1,702
Likes
602
#9
Once a month 3 day window for registration seems reasonable to me. Some posts I've seen over the years here have deserved permanent bans. Granted they can sign up again but given enough time these posters invariably go back to their old habits and get banned again.
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#10
Once a month 3 day window for registration seems reasonable to me. Some posts I've seen over the years here have deserved permanent bans. Granted they can sign up again but given enough time these posters invariably go back to their old habits and get banned again.
The constant re-registering is what I was hoping to avoid. When you have an announced 3-day window, what happens is people with a track record of constantly getting themselves banned will come in a register 5-10 different handles during that window.

Over a long enough period of time, you end up with 10 times the number of registered users as there are actual people posting behind them.

IMO a better solution would be to allow registration at anytime but it should be done by making some sort of contact first. Either an email request to the admin or by invite from an active member. However this method will only work if permanent bans are toned down. Registration of sock puppets and a liberal permanent ban policy go hand in hand.

If you keep banning people, they will keep coming back with multiples. If the bans are for a shorter duration, sort of like a "time-out", there is a greater chance that the person will sit it out and come back under the same handle when it is unbanned, rather than register a new one...or ten...and keep pulling the same shit - knowing he's got 9 more lives to spare.

Plus it will allow us to better know who is who rather than constantly having "new members" who really aren't new.

Does that make sense to anyone?
 

GoldWampum

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
4,278
Likes
1,335
#11
I think these are some good suggestions that have been presented. Very much worth considering. I don't think members should be the ones voting or deciding either. Pure democracy sucks. It ruins anything it touches. Mods deciding with input among themselves would be a more stable approach. I think the registration window sucks. It just propagates confusion in bursts.

The sponsorship gate would be something good too. Accountability... (3 dots for emphasis)
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,519
Likes
3,456
#12
I think these are some good suggestions that have been presented. Very much worth considering. I don't think members should be the ones voting or deciding either. Pure democracy sucks. It ruins anything it touches. Mods deciding with input among themselves would be a more stable approach. I think the registration window sucks. It just propagates confusion in bursts.
Exactly!

I also agree that members should not be voting on other members, "deomcracy" style. That's the job of the mods. Members should only be able to "vouch" for a new member who has been invited. If that member is a total shmuck, guess whose creditbity is jeopardized...

I do like the new way of doing permanent bans - 3 mods have to sign off on it. It eliminates the risk of having a trigger happy mod who's just having a bad day and decides to go on a rampage.

I also don't thing their should ever be a permanent ban for a first offense unless it is just an obvious spammer. Hopefully with the new registration rules, we won't see too many of those anyway.