Wild Wild West - Part 2

[Mike Greathouse]

The way this is going to work is that the ability to assess warning points will be tied to the already existing membership levels. If you are already a Benefactor or Endowment level member then this ability will be provided with that membership level at no additional cost, once it is implemented. However, if you are a Contributor level member or a regular registered member (no paid level membership) then yes, if you wish to have this capability of being able to assess warning points, then you will have to become one of those two higher levels or membership in order to do so.

Am I reading this correctly?
In order to participate, you have to be at one of the two highest levels of membership? So all of those individuals who have supported this site at the $25.00 level are of no consequence!

 

[WebSlave]

Am I reading this correctly?
In order to participate, you have to be at one of the two highest levels of membership? So all of those individuals who have supported this site at the $25.00 level are of no consequence!

I am being somewhat cautious about implementing this, Mike. But please don't try putting words in my mouth. VERY unsanitary.......... Those are YOUR words, not mine. YOUR interpretation of how I am doing this, not MINE.

 

[Mike Greathouse]

I am being somewhat cautious about implementing this, Mike. But please don't try putting words in my mouth. VERY unsanitary.......... Those are YOUR words, not mine. YOUR interpretation of how I am doing this, not MINE.

Alright, I'll rephrase.
Just so that I understand correctly.
This new toy is only going to be made available to the two highest levels of membership. Is that correct?

 

[Chameleon Company]

Well, it would seem that we are debating a system that would require a minimal membership level of Benefactor, which is $100 per year. Or the higher Endowment level of $250. $25 Contributor level membership does not yet seem to be of any consequence regarding the ability to administer warning points in the new system. If that is how it ends up, then it seems I will remain on the receiving end, if at all.

 

[Mooing Tricycle]

I think that the new system might work out(after the initial flurry). If you feel someone is a "lying thief" you can say taht the person has lied "Provide example" and has stolen XX"Provide proof" as opposed to simply saying "You scumbag". Maybe it will lead to more polite posting? There is that adage that a armed society is a polite society.

I agree and these are my exact same feelings, there are certain ways to act around a group of people and TO people, and why should someone always be nastilly blunt about it? If youre going to be nastilly blunt, or whatever youd like to call it, then expect to get reprimanded. There is no reason for it. This is not Highschool, we can all act like the adults were supposed to be. and if not, well if all the cards are played right the new system will see to it they are removed.


People who post on a thread "Should I keep my boa at 200F?" should be told "No. You'll kill your boa. The appropiate temp is xxF" they don't need a post saying "You dumb poo head jerk! You just want to kill all animals!" See the subtle idea? Are they stupid? Probaly. But this way if someone runs off at them in a rude way, they risk getting a ding for being rude and offensive and cursing. (I'm assuming in real life they would use foul language not poo-head)
I dunno what level I'm at, and I haven't figured out what level I'd have to be at to vote points or whatever. I'm not all that worried. I think I have one bad karma point, from a political thread, that I knew better than to bother posting on. Nothing good ever comes from discussing religion or politics. If people want to bash me for having an opinion different from them, I guess it'll happen. Until then, I won't worry over it. If I really dislike the system and the way it gets used, I'll just not visit this site. It's not rocket science. It's the internet. I like this site, and I like the BOI.

*Hugs* we need more people like you.... Please dont ever go. ^_-
Again, same views on this. people should not be chastised when they come here asking to learn. We should be helping them to better understand their animals, and hopefully see another regular member on the site. I dont care if you dont like the person, this site isnt about individuals, if you dont like what somone has said, ignore it and move on, if they are insulting you. well thats what karma, and the new system will be for.
This place is about a GROUP who all have the same common interest. Should we not be trying to help more of those same people out?

Why? It's just colors on a site. Don't visit if its that big a deal. I REALLY loved the one comment of "It looks like someone ate a box of crayons and threw up on the screen". That made me laugh so hard.
I've enjoyed the site so far, and hope to continue enjoying it.


the color change is the funniest thing thats ever happened since ive been here! i was laughing that entire night

my stuff is in bold in the quote...

 

[WebSlave]

Alright, I'll rephrase.
Just so that I understand correctly.
This new toy is only going to be made available to the two highest levels of membership. Is that correct?

Yes. That is correct. And I also believe this was mentioned earlier in this thread......

 

[Griz]

Out of curiosity Rich, how many people do you have at these 2 levels?

Griz

 

[Mike Greathouse]

Well, it would seem that we are debating a system that would require a minimal membership level of Benefactor, which is $100 per year. Or the higher Endowment level of $250. $25 Contributor level membership does not yet seem to be of any consequence regarding the ability to administer warning points in the new system. If that is how it ends up, then it seems I will remain on the receiving end, if at all.

Jim,
Agreed. It would seem that this is being implemented more as a money making opportunity, then as an enhancement, or even, a social experiment.

Here's the funny part. I wonder how many of the individuals here with enhanced accounts, obtained them by virtue of being the fastest to respond to the call for Forum Moderators back when Rich was looking for help to resurrect the forum traffic.

I am still of the mindset that this program should have been established with an equal point value for all members. Given the actual parameters, I will not be participating either.

 

[WebSlave]

Out of curiosity Rich, how many people do you have at these 2 levels?

Griz

43. Some of which were given that membership level during my forum moderators program. Those will expire sometime in the next few months.

 

[Mooing Tricycle]

I am being somewhat cautious about implementing this, Mike. But please don't try putting words in my mouth. VERY unsanitary.......... Those are YOUR words, not mine. YOUR interpretation of how I am doing this, not MINE.

Why not open it to a group of beta testers then?

 

[christopher66]

When the new program is implemented,will the slate be wiped clean?
As in the existing warning points and karma points being turned back to 0 ?
My .02 is that i think it would be good to have a new playing field to go with the new program.

 

[Mooing Tricycle]

When the new program is implemented,will the slate be wiped clean?
As in the existing warning points and karma points being turned back to 0 ?
My .02 is that i think it would be good to have a new playing field to go with the new program.

That is another excellent idea! i like this one!

 

[WebSlave]

Jim,
Agreed. It would seem that this is being implemented more as a money making opportunity, then as an enhancement, or even, a social experiment.

You are certainly welcome to have your own opinion on this. I stated my reasons for the manner in which I am filtering participation earlier in this thread. I doubt anyone could make a seriously valid argument that those Benefactor and Endowment level members have NOT made a demonstratably notable and supportive committment to the health and welfare of this site. And it just so happens that this manner of selection criteria proves to be imminently suitable (and easy) for implementing this plan. So that was my choice to do, regardless of some perceived deficiencies based on alternate criteria.

As I mentioned earlier (sure do wish I didn't have to repeat myself so much), I seriously doubt ANYONE is going to spend the money JUST to be able to assess warning points, which is EXACTLY why I am using those higher level memberships. Only those members already inclined to be higher level supporters will have this "power" here. I WANT the hurdle to be high exactly for that reason. If it is too LOW, then it WILL be abused, and probably quite often as it would be a frivolous exercise to do so. If it is TOO high for some, then fine, that's just the way it is going to be. You apparently don't have enough incentive to use the warning points, which is probably just as well.

As for it being an enhancement, well that remains to be seen. But quite DEFINITELY, it most certainly is an experiment.......

Here's the funny part. I wonder how many of the individuals here with enhanced accounts, obtained them by virtue of being the fastest to respond to the call for Forum Moderators back when Rich was looking for help to resurrect the forum traffic.

Yes, that is correct (and I am glad you find humor in that fact), and once those enhanced memberships expire, they will not be automatically renewed. I have basically given up on the discussion forums as being a lost cause on this site. They will be whatever they will be.

If you can recall, there was a hurdle in place for that project as well. Anyone applying for the position of forum moderator HAD to be a paid member beforehand. So in like kind, I used the paid member qualification in that selection process, which is the same criteria being used here. This is no difference at all, only the bar is higher.

I am still of the mindset that this program should have been established with an equal point value for all members. Given the actual parameters, I will not be participating either.

Sorry, but that is just not a reasonable method, IMHO, to implement this. Some people are scared silly of it being abused, and without having some restrictions on who can wield the warning points, it would be justifiably so.

Your claim that it should be open to ALL members also must include ALL REGULAR REGISTERED MEMBERS, which would be pure folly on my part. Would you REALLY want falsely registered members to be able to utilize the warning points? Well, even if you do, I do NOT.

As for your not participating, that is fine with me. It certainly is not mandatory for anyone, even the site moderators nor myself to assess warning points to anyone. I am just giving the opportunity to those who REALLY want to do so, to be able to do so. If no one utilizes it, then that is certainly no skin off of my butt either.

 

[WebSlave]

Why not open it to a group of beta testers then?

Considering the small number of current users who will actually be able to utilize this, I think this will already be a reasonable beta test initially...

Seriously, I don't think there is going to be anything like a flood of warning points being issued that some Chicken Littles are expecting......

 

[christopher66]

Would someone please paste the link to the membership fee page.

 

[WebSlave]

When the new program is implemented,will the slate be wiped clean?
As in the existing warning points and karma points being turned back to 0 ?
My .02 is that i think it would be good to have a new playing field to go with the new program.

Sorry, but no. For the following reasons:

• This has really nothing to do with the karma points other than if you should happen to get fined and suspended, the program automatically tacks on some negative karma to you. Something like 100 points, if I remember correctly. The warning points are for violations of the site rules. Karma points are someone's OPINION of the quality of the content of your post. Certainly the two can overlap, but they are separate in function.
  
• The level to get fined and suspended will be VERY HIGH. The level will be such that any warning points now on your record will be insignificant to that total being needed for the axe to fall. Actually I may set it TOO high, but I would rather err on the side of caution in this respect. I can always ratchet it down if needed, which would be preferable to having to clean up a mess caused by it being too low.

 

[Mooing Tricycle]

Considering the small number of current users who will actually be able to utilize this, I think this will already be a reasonable beta test initially...

Seriously, I don't think there is going to be anything like a flood of warning points being issued that some Chicken Littles are expecting......

yeah once i saw how many people are actually benefactor and endowment members i thought that too was a really reasonable amount of people to try it out!
Thanks rich!

 

[DAND]

Would someone please paste the link to the membership fee page.

You can click on any members (even you own) membership coin and you'll be there.

 

[christopher66]

Sorry, but no. For the following reasons:

• This has really nothing to do with the karma points other than if you should happen to get fined and suspended, the program automatically tacks on some negative karma to you. Something like 100 points, if I remember correctly. The warning points are for violations of the site rules. Karma points are someone's OPINION of the quality of the content of your post. Certainly the two can overlap, but they are separate in function.
  
• The level to get fined and suspended will be VERY HIGH. The level will be such that any warning points now on your record will be insignificant to that total being needed for the axe to fall. Actually I may set it TOO high, but I would rather err on the side of caution in this respect. I can always ratchet it down if needed, which would be preferable to having to clean up a mess caused by it being too low.

Gotcha

 

[Mike Greathouse]

I doubt anyone could make a seriously valid argument that those Benefactor and Endowment level members have NOT made a demonstratably notable and supportive committment to the health and welfare of this site.

I think that there are just as many people who have contributed to the success of this site who are at the $25.00 or $0.00 level. After all, a public forum is only as good as the public that contributes their point of view.

Your claim that it should be open to ALL members also must include ALL REGULAR REGISTERED MEMBERS, which would be pure folly on my part. Would you REALLY want falsely registered members to be able to utilize the warning points?

Yes, I do think that it should be open to all members. However, my view of the membership here is well documented. I don't think there should be a registered member classification that has not been verified via a nominal payment to the site. Kind of like the way it was when many of us pushed for and succeeeded in making this a paid membership site in the first place.

As for your not participating, that is fine with me. It certainly is not mandatory for anyone, even the site moderators nor myself to assess warning points to anyone. I am just giving the opportunity to those who REALLY want to do so, to be able to do so. If no one utilizes it, then that is certainly no skin off of my butt either.

It is, what it is.