• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

Wild Wild West - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike Greathouse said:
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.
Click to expand...

Actually that is not quite accurate. The paid requirement was for posting privileges on the BOI ONLY. Not the entire site. And quite honestly it flopped.

What you are proposing now, if I read this correctly, is for me to make this entire site a fee based registration? In other words, charge a FEE for everyone simply to register here? Yeah, I'm sure THAT would go over real well........... :rolleyes:
 
Rich, I don't know if this is public information or not, but can we find out which users fall into these 2 categories? I am curious as to what extent they have actually been involved in the site. Thanks.

Griz
 
WebSlave said:
Actually that is not quite accurate. The paid requirement was for posting privileges on the BOI ONLY. Not the entire site. And quite honestly it flopped.

What you are proposing now, if I read this correctly, is for me to make this entire site a fee based registration? In other words, charge a FEE for everyone simply to register here? Yeah, I'm sure THAT would go over real well........... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
No, What I'm referring to is the BOI. Let's face it, 99% of this new program will likely take place there.

Just for clarification, I don't have a personal stake in this new program.
I seriously doubt that I would find myself in a position to wield that weapon.
I just feel that limiting this to the highest levels of membership does not make for an effective tool. This was proposed as a method for the site to somewhat self-moderate. Yet, by design, the only ones able to effect any changes are the existing moderators and a few people who have opted to pay for the privilege. Doesn't seem very Democratic to me...
 
Just looking at the top 10 Karma users, something that should at least showcase their contributions to this board according to the public, only 1 of the 10 would qualify. Just some food for thought.

Griz
 
Griz said:
Just looking at the top 10 Karma users, something that should at least showcase their contributions to this board according to the public, only 1 of the 10 would qualify. Just some food for thought.

Griz
Click to expand...
And the one would be Rich, right?
I'm guessing he's quickly approaching the threshold of regretting that he ever attempted to do this.
 
Rich,

I thank you for taking the time to answer and participate here. As for my not realizing the payment levels noted earlier, they were here and I just didn't see it as I skimmed to catch-up after a couple days away.
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.
Click to expand...

And by the same token, are you then saying that those at the Contributor level ($25) have not also made a "demonstrably notable and supportive commitment ......... ", if that is the criteria ? Maybe just not as demonstrable ..... maybe not of "no consequence", just of "little consequence" ? With all the discussion here, and in prior threads, I have to agree with Mike that it seems a bit pointless, as so many who otherwise contribute here (no pun intended) will not be a part of this peer revue. Such that without a lowering of the participation level, and allowing for the expiration of the moderator up-grades, the number who actively participate here currently and who would qualify may be able to be counted on two hands, with fingers to spare ? I think it possible that the site may generate more income with its ability to entice larger numbers of folks to the $25 level than the lesser number who may opt for the $100 level. In all honesty, and in the true spirit of our Founding Fathers, as described it stinks of elitism, and has no semblance of a "peer review".
 
I like the Ashley blue and cream yellow scheme on the board now. Yesterday's neon oranges and electric yellows were too zany.
 
Do you ever wonder if this whole site isn't some grad students thesis?

Maybe Rich is just some wacko corn breeder who likes to sadomasochisitically interact with strangers on the net.

I'm fast loosing what little care I had for this whole thing.

I still say it's a bad idea, but I now say it's looking even worse than it did at its original unvieling.
 
lucille said:
I like the Ashley blue and cream yellow scheme on the board now. Yesterday's neon oranges and electric yellows were too zany.
Click to expand...
Huh!

Lucille, this thread has moved to the point of defining what this site is about and your contribution is about the color scheme?

Oh my, look at that pretty mushroom cloud in the distance.

I expected more from you.
 
Mike Greathouse said:
Huh!

Lucille, this thread has moved to the point of defining what this site is about and your contribution is about the color scheme?

Oh my, look at that pretty mushroom cloud in the distance.

I expected more from you.
Click to expand...

Apparently, you are expecting all sorts of things from everyone. I think a light comment here was not out of place.
 
lucille said:
Apparently, you are expecting all sorts of things from everyone. I think a light comment here was not out of place.
Click to expand...
MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE
 
Mike Greathouse said:
Doesn't seem very Democratic to me...
Click to expand...

Whatever gave you the impression that this site is a Democracy? In a TRUE democratic society, 51 percent of the people can vote to LEGALLY kill and eat the other 40 percent. :yesnod:
 
Mike Greathouse said:
And the one would be Rich, right?
I'm guessing he's quickly approaching the threshold of regretting that he ever attempted to do this.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. My only regret is that I allowed this thread to go off course from my original question that was asked... :rofl:
 
WebSlave said:
Whatever gave you the impression that this site is a Democracy? In a TRUE democratic society, 51 percent of the people can vote to LEGALLY kill and eat the other 40 percent. :yesnod:
Click to expand...
That's what I thought we were doing with this new program.
Allowing the membership to make a statement about those who cross the line and deserve to be eaten.
 
WebSlave said:
Whatever gave you the impression that this site is a Democracy? In a TRUE democratic society, 51 percent of the people can vote to LEGALLY kill and eat the other 40 percent. :yesnod:
Click to expand...
Let's say there is a line in the sand, we all know how much you like lines Rich.

On one side of the line, you're the king, what you say goes, no questions asked.

On the other side of that line is Democracy, where opinions are asked for and given.

You, as the titular ruler, keep standing on the side of the line that best suits your mood at the moment.

One moment you are asking what we, the members, think or what we, the members, would suggest you do.

The next moment you have stepped over that line and are stating by decree how things will be, often belittling those who bothered to give the opinions you asked for.

NOW do you see how someone could mistake this ambiguity for democracy?
 
griz said:
I just wish that Rich would stop being such a sadist and just implement his ideas. I don't believe he really wants our thoughts/concerns on this nor do I believe that he necessarily needs to. Instead of throwing things out there to get the membership riled just put it in force and move on. Either that, or leave things alone and stay behind the scenes. I am starting to believe he really likes the attention, whether negative or not!
Click to expand...

Still trying to figure out how to give myself Karma......

Griz
 
Remeber Rich, just because something might appear to be fun does not mean it is a good idea......

cpation_2006-10-17.JPG


Griz
 
Rich,

Whatever gave you the impression that this site is a Democracy? In a TRUE democratic society, 51 percent of the people can vote to LEGALLY kill and eat the other 40 percent.
Click to expand...

OK, lets include the word "Republic", so that we now have a Democratic Republic ? Is that better ? Look Rich, you have established that the "voters" have to be land-owners ... actually plantation owners. Masssa Rich, how about just land-owners ?

As for :
No, not at all. My only regret is that I allowed this thread to go off course from my original question that was asked...
Click to expand...

Well, here's from your first post intitiating this thread:
Anyway, here's my gameplan. I want to offer qualified (PAID MEMBERS) the capability of assessing warning points to other members. I hear members complaining about other members all of the time, and they basically want ME to do something about it. It's getting to be a pain in the butt hearing such things. So I'm thinking about having the various levels of paid members have the capability of collectively ousting someone who is considered to be a major pain in the butt.

............ So let the members themselves police the site. If enough people feel that a particular member shouldn't be there, then they have the power to do something about it.

............Power multiplier for each Membership type (ie: Contributor level = x 1, Endowment level = x 2, Admin level = x 10) - Or alternatively, some warnings are only available to certain membership levels..
Click to expand...

So, who is off topic ?

Did I confuse your use of the word "members" to actually represent some semblance of the word "members". Yup ! As Griz pointed out, most of your actual peer-recognized participants here don't rate as adequate enough "members" now. You gave the opinion that this was for members to self-police. But its not, its only for the most monied few. How effective will that be, with just a handful having police power ? It absolutely defeats the intent as stated in your first post, if not directly contradicts certain statements. Benevolent dictatorship maybe ?
 
Wilomn said:
MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE MENTAL IGNORE
Click to expand...

Wesley: Please ignore the fact that I think you are an idiotic troll that looks for the location of any line drawn anywhere just so you can leap over it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top