Should the Lounge have a Waiting Period?
#30
Quote:If a new member can't wait three days to post, odds are they're not going to fit in.
Not really. It's sometimes not a matter of lacking the patience to wait but rather not remembering that the place even existed. If he had posted something at all, chances are that he would return to check on the replies and continue staying on. If such a person is but a passing troll (who wouldn't fit in anyway), then good... but if it is a genuinely good poster, then it's simply a backfire of the implementation.

The quality of a forum is only as good as the quality of the posters. If you start missing out on one or two posters at a time, gradually the pool of quality posters would diminish as older posters start to lose interest etc and not enough new ones are taking their place.

Yes, keeping trolls out is nice but the inhibition (sp?) of new posters could well lead to the stagnation of the forum community.

Quote:I'm sick of seeing every other thread turn into an argument or flame war about grammar, rules, etiquette, or other issues that anyone who lurked for even a few days before posting should grasp immediately.
In the first place, is there a need to flame? A single post or two by admin or forum regular would more than suffice as a warning. Subsequent persistent disregard for forum etiquette is easily the quickest way out.

In any case, having a three-day waiting period does not ensure a new member would lurk around and read. He who does silly things without reading around is likely to still do likewise whether you give him one day, three days or ten.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Should the Lounge have a Waiting Period? - by Raz - 06-24-2003, 03:41 AM
Should the Lounge have a Waiting Period? - by Guest - 06-24-2003, 10:36 PM
Should the Lounge have a Waiting Period? - by Ice - 06-25-2003, 08:02 AM
Should the Lounge have a Waiting Period? - by Ice - 06-25-2003, 06:17 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)