Petition for right to start a thread in GM only for users with over 500 posts. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Petition for right to start a thread in GM only for users with over 500 posts.

*Viva Chile*
11-13-2007, 01:09 AM
Many of us are discussing in GM about that some new members since the first moment start to open a lot of useless threads or for talk about annoying and :zzz: themes that have been discussed 1000000000 times in this forum. Many of them are inmediate material for the ACC or for a ban, also many have been double accounts of former (now banned) users.

For the ones that support this iniciative vote YES. If you disagree vote NO.
If you have another opinion, choose the third option and explain your idea in this thread.

Thank you :yeah:

Alonsofz
11-13-2007, 02:26 AM
Yeah, but only in GM. :p

*Viva Chile*
11-13-2007, 02:34 AM
Yeah, but only in GM. :p

Thanks, I agree with that, I will change the thread title ;)

Hendu
11-13-2007, 02:39 AM
Right now, out of the 30 (non sticky) threads in GM, 13 were created by posters with less than 500 posts. Thats 43,3%.

But I'm still not sure those threads are more annoying or make their starters more ACC deserving than the rest of the threads.

Not allowing users with less than 500 posts to start thraeds, would probably discourage users to get double accounts to start troll threads...

But I don't know, I haven't made up my mind yet.

mangoes
11-13-2007, 02:48 AM
I don't support banning the option. Maybe putting a limit on the number of theads that can be started by a newbie...

theMEESH
11-13-2007, 03:15 AM
Well, I've been here for four years and I still don't have 500 posts... in fact, I didn't even have 50 at the beginning of this year. I don't think that people with 500 or fewer posts should be prohibited from creating threads in GM, but maybe they should be limited to how many they can make within a certain time frame. That would be cool.

Or if it was 500 posts or 3 months of being part of the forum. I dunno, I just think that if I wanted to post a new thread in GM (which will probably never happen anyway), I should be able to even if I don't have 500 posts, seeing as I've been here quite a long time.

Did that make any sense?

El Legenda
11-13-2007, 05:09 AM
Is there even a way of making this happen?

baghdatis
11-13-2007, 05:35 AM
Well, I've been here for four years and I still don't have 500 posts... in fact, I didn't even have 50 at the beginning of this year. I don't think that people with 500 or fewer posts should be prohibited from creating threads in GM, but maybe they should be limited to how many they can make within a certain time frame. That would be cool.

Or if it was 500 posts or 3 months of being part of the forum. I dunno, I just think that if I wanted to post a new thread in GM (which will probably never happen anyway), I should be able to even if I don't have 500 posts, seeing as I've been here quite a long time.

Did that make any sense?


I had over 1,000 in 2 months on the forum.

How about taking into account how frequently a user uses MTF?

VolandriFan
11-13-2007, 05:42 AM
Perhaps 200 posts and/or 3 months is a better idea. 500 seems pretty steep, considering some poster's don't use MTF as frequently as others.

Nathaliia
11-13-2007, 12:25 PM
I more suggest before accepting the account of a new user, to make him a test of knowledge the GM rules, practical exercise containing ability of using search button and the IQ researches are an option too.

But that's just me.

Shabazza
11-13-2007, 03:11 PM
I more suggest before accepting the account of a new user, to make him a test of knowledge the GM rules, practical exercise containing ability of using search button and the IQ researches are an option too.

But that's just me.

The trolls would pass and keep on trolling. Well, for the others - it's most likely not because they don't know, but because they don't want to use the search button. Most people are just lazy like a bone. Knowing how to use the search option wouldn't change this fact.
Then again, they might be even too lazy to think and wouldn't bother with the test and stay out of MTF all together. Wouldn't hurt.

Naranoc
11-13-2007, 08:53 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure of this. A lot of the worst trolling is done by posters with over 500 posts, or at least, those who are regular users of MTF. Implementing this is obviously an issue too.

16681
11-13-2007, 08:59 PM
I don't think stopping a new member from fully using part of the Forum even for a limited time is a good idea. It might seem to send the message that new members aren't liked, wanted, or appreciated. Which I don't think is the message MTF should send to people.

belco
11-14-2007, 12:48 AM
I represent the newbies as their virtual lawyer

:shout: leave them alone :armed:

Newbies have to start out somewhere and restricting their access is not going to help them.

Lee
11-14-2007, 01:41 PM
I represent the newbies as their virtual lawyer

:shout: leave them alone :armed:

Newbies have to start out somewhere and restricting their access is not going to help them.


Where's your vid?

*Viva Chile*
11-14-2007, 02:30 PM
I represent the newbies as their virtual lawyer

:shout: leave them alone :armed:

Newbies have to start out somewhere and restricting their access is not going to help them.

Maybe 500 posts is too much. But nearly in every forums you need to have certain amounts of posts to have certain benefits. Why not here?

Jimnik
11-14-2007, 03:30 PM
I reckon 100 posts should be enough, and this is for GM only.

Nathaliia
11-14-2007, 03:47 PM
And to play TT.

+alonso
11-15-2007, 01:39 AM
Hmm, I dont know, If you have more posts that doesn't mean you don't post just useless sh*t or would be a "better" poster in terms of behaviour.
Maybe there are people who can really share their knowledge and be an important factor in the quality of the forum but doesnt like to post much. So I'd say NO.

Denaon
11-15-2007, 03:17 AM
Freedom of speech...always :rocker:

*Viva Chile*
11-15-2007, 03:20 AM
I reckon 100 posts should be enough, and this is for GM only.

for all the people who voted NO, what about only 100 posts? at least it's a decent number to at least know an user a little more before it started to open threads in GM

Denaon
11-15-2007, 03:34 AM
I suggest Steve to add a feature to the forum that relates threads by "matching" words...it might help mods to merge in a easier way those threads that might discuss similar issues...that's likely the best solution imo...instead of restricting any new member to post right after they register...
Or they might have to spend some time posting in the Million thread...

:scratch: Now...giving it a second thought...:p

:aplot:

l_mac
11-15-2007, 08:48 PM
Maybe Steve should create a new newbie forum where they can post their super-original all-new threads for vetting purposes.

If everyone thinks 500 posts is too much, how about limiting newbies' new threads to one a week?

Fee
11-15-2007, 08:57 PM
Something needs to be done. It will also stop newbies from spamming, signing up to promote another forum, blog, or website, then disappearing. Perhaps 100 posts is a good option, or moderator approval of new threads by newbies, or something.

Zirconek
11-15-2007, 09:14 PM
Some good threads in sections like "statistics" and "blast from the past" were started by newbies or even people with less than 100 posts and are member for years.
General Messages sucks especially because of the posters with over a hundred of posts.

l_mac
11-15-2007, 09:21 PM
The ban would only be for GM, so the new posters making excellent threads in other forums wouldn't be affected.

GM might "suck", but it would suck less if we didn't have newbie spammers starting 6 threads a day, or trying out their tard wings with threads which are only meant to annoy.

jayjay
11-16-2007, 01:23 AM
Is there even a way of making this happen?

You sound worried? You should be. Alot of useless threads can be found among your 26k+ posts.

Maybe 500 posts is too much. But nearly in every forums you need to have certain amounts of posts to have certain benefits. Why not here?

That just leads to spamming. For your average, sensible poster it takes quite a while to make 500 posts as a newbie on a board when you are still getting to grips with the nuances of a board. And a good spammer can make 500 posts in no time at all on a forum this big.

If everyone thinks 500 posts is too much, how about limiting newbies' new threads to one a week?

That might be a good idea for existing members too (regardless of post count), alot of the BS on GM (in totality, maybe not recently) is posted by people who have been here a while and/or have large post counts.

Hendu
11-16-2007, 05:11 AM
You sound worried? You should be. Alot of useless threads can be found among your 26k+ posts.

That just leads to spamming. For your average, sensible poster it takes quite a while to make 500 posts as a newbie on a board when you are still getting to grips with the nuances of a board. And a good spammer can make 500 posts in no time at all on a forum this big.

That might be a good idea for existing members too (regardless of post count), alot of the BS on GM (in totality, maybe not recently) is posted by people who have been here a while and/or have large post counts.

Good points.

krystlel
11-16-2007, 07:16 AM
I think limiting the number of new threads that can be created by newbies would be best. Moderator approval in theory would be good idea, that way, those newbies that are making good threads won't be penalized, but if that were to happen, I would imagine that the criteria for approval would not be strict at all, since it wouldn't be fair otherwise that those with larger post counts are able to make dumb posts while they can't.

I don't really agree with needing a certain post count - it took me a long time myself to rack up the posts and we shouldn't encourage people to make useless posts just to get their post count up.

Nathaliia
11-16-2007, 10:50 AM
Insomniac needs to sleep :lol:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=6270671#post6270671

Neely
11-16-2007, 02:39 PM
Some good opinions, but it's not so easy to find the best possible solution.

I think a limit would be good sometimes because there are really a lot of new users who make many strange, needless, redundant threads which upsets not only mods, but also users who are seeking better contents than that.

It is right that a minimum post number in GM could only increase idiotic posts just for the sake to reach the limit. I see this also very problematic. But I know that this solution could be implemented. What I don't know if we also could make a more specific filter like: "do not allow a user who signed up less than x months ago and who has less than xxx posts to create more than x threads in GM during a span of x days".


I suggest Steve to add a feature to the forum that relates threads by "matching" words...it might help mods to merge in a easier way those threads that might discuss similar issues...that's likely the best solution imo...instead of restricting any new member to post right after they register...
I have no idea about such a feature to describe more intelligently the content in better words than what people write in it or use as a thread title. Means if a user makes a thread "Young sucks" and then writes in it "And PMK fixed a match". It would not add automatically matching words or tags: "match fixing, cheating, Davydenko".

To find a thread with its title or content, you are still reliable that the users use these words in order that you find it over the forum search function.

Denaon
11-16-2007, 02:48 PM
Some good opinions, but it's not so easy to find the best possible solution.

I think a limit would be good sometimes because there are really a lot of new users who make many strange, needless, redundant threads which upsets not only mods, but also users who are seeking better contents than that.

It is right that a minimum post number in GM could only increase idiotic posts just for the sake to reach the limit. I see this also very problematic. But I know that this solution could be implemented. What I don't know if we also could make a more specific filter like: "do not allow a user who signed up less than x months ago and who has less than xxx posts to create more than x threads in GM during a span of x days".


I have no idea about such a feature to describe more intelligently the content in better words than what people write in it or use as a thread title. Means if a user makes a thread "Young sucks" and then writes in it "And PMK fixed a match". It would not add automatically matching words or tags: "match fixing, cheating, Davydenko".

To find a thread with its title or content, you are still reliable that the users use these words in order that you find it over the forum search function.

I think what this feature does is relate both title and first post with other old threads....:shrug:
It's just a suggestion....I mean...it's some kind of shortcut to other threads...and I think it's certainly much better for mods than for regular posters...this way mods can easily merge similar threads...

I'm absolutely against any type of restriction....because you're generalizing....who says which is a :retard: thread or which is a smart one?
It's pretty subjective...and I would be really pissed off with this forum if I had to post +500 times (or +100...whatever) to have a chance to start a thread about tennis in the GM...mostly when this forum is about TENNIS

Neely
11-16-2007, 03:02 PM
I think what this feature does is relate both title and first post with other old threads....:shrug:
It's just a suggestion....I mean...it's some kind of shortcut to other threads...and I think it's certainly much better for mods than for regular posters...this way mods can easily merge similar threads...
Ah okay, now I understand it what you mean exactly. I think I have seen this already somewhere else.

I'm absolutely against any type of restriction....because you're generalizing....who says which is a :retard: thread or which is a smart one?
Yes sure, that's what it is about mostly all the times if you are dealing with dynamic and individually created content - not only that, sometimes the relation or context matters, too. It's not as easy as maths that you accept something if it is in the range between 0 and 2.99 and that you reject anything of 3 and bigger.

Let's just agree that two threads of a relatively new user about the serving stats of Federer, asking if Federer prefers Nadal or Ferrer ("Who is more prefer"), creating "you fuckers deleting my thread?" and then "freedom of speech for all" is not the best possible introduction into a new forum. All within the last hours by the same user in GM.

Denaon
11-16-2007, 03:10 PM
Ah okay, now I understand it what you mean exactly. I think I have seen this already somewhere else.


Yes sure, that's what it is about mostly all the times if you are dealing with dynamic and individually created content - not only that, sometimes the relation or context matters, too. It's not as easy as maths that you accept something if it is in the range between 0 and 2.99 and that you reject anything of 3 and bigger.

Let's just agree that two threads of a relatively new user about the serving stats of Federer, asking if Federer prefers Nadal or Ferrer ("Who is more prefer"), creating "you fuckers deleting my thread?" and then "freedom of speech for all" is not the best possible introduction into a new forum. All within the last hours by the same user in GM.
Well....you're giving an example of some newbie..right? That's the correct way to treat this issue...individually...:shrug:
It's not fair to treat every newbie like some dumbass that will start crappy threads just for the sake of it....and I think that most of the newbies have been lurking for a while before registering and trying to make their voice heard (read).
I know I did lurk a lot of time before I registered :yeah:....
:scratch: maybe not a good example :tape: :lol:

Denaon
11-16-2007, 03:26 PM
but if implemented this restriction to new members....I say:

NEWBIES GO AND TAKE CONTROL OF THE INTRO FORUM!!! POST THERE ALL YOUR CRAPPY REPETITIVE NEW THREADS ABOUT FEDERER, NADAL AND #1 SPOT!!!!
:secret: until you have +500 posts and you can post in GM ;)

:rocker: NEWBIES UNITED!!!

l_mac
11-16-2007, 04:00 PM
It is right that a minimum post number in GM could only increase idiotic posts just for the sake to reach the limit. I see this also very problematic. But I know that this solution could be implemented. What I don't know if we also could make a more specific filter like: "do not allow a user who signed up less than x months ago and who has less than xxx posts to create more than x threads in GM during a span of x days".



That would be good if you could do that. In the original thread, where we were talking about this, the reason a three month time delay was suggested was to prevent spamming just to reach 500 posts. Anyone signing up who is willing to wait 3 months and spam to get to 500 would find a way to be annoying anyway. :lol:

I lurked on MTF for years before I started posting regularly, or maybe I would have felt the need to start "Who is the greatest player ever?" type thread or "Which is better - Steffi Graf's forehand, or Roger's?" But, sadly, not everyone is like me. Some people like to charge right in and act like they're changing the boundaries on tennis discussion with their revolutionary new ideas. I just think if there was some way of making sure that new posters relaxed, took in the scenery and watched how MTF worked for a month or two, then GM could be a happier place. Newbies who would have genuinely start repeat threads by mistake wouldn't be pounced on and derided (because GM can be very hostile for new posters) and idiots who wanted to be annoying would have to be patient :lol: I think it would also help cut down on duplicate accounts.

Maybe a new sticky about the search function would also help.

El Legenda
11-18-2007, 07:28 PM
Freedom of speech...always :rocker:

that means nothing in a private place like MTF...freedom of speech only works in a public place. :p

Denaon
11-18-2007, 07:56 PM
that means nothing in a private place like MTF...freedom of speech only works in a public place. :p

not necesarilly true...

~*BGT*~
11-21-2007, 05:36 PM
This is similar to a something I heard. People who support abortion have already been born. People who support this idea already have 500 posts. Think about it. :yeah:

dejosav
11-22-2007, 01:44 PM
This is similar to a something I heard. People who support abortion have already been born. People who support this idea already have 500 posts. Think about it. :yeah:

I don't, and the way i was posting in 6 months maybe i'll never have 500 posts, but i do support idea like this or similar, i just don't want new sixpack opening dozens of threads first day of membership giving advices to Nadal... :haha: :smash:

Jimnik
11-25-2007, 12:34 AM
Please, PLEASE. We really should take this under serious consideration. How many times are we going to let this happen? They all enter MTF as though they think they're the biggest and best thing that ever hit the forum. They think they're so smart and original and they can make the place so much more interesting by starting all these fascinating topics. :retard:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113592
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113587
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113591
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113589
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113593
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113590
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113603
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113596

How stupid do you have to be to start 8 new threads within the first few hours of your membership? :retard: :smash: :retard:

If you ask me, it's not even funny anymore.

Jimnik
11-25-2007, 12:37 AM
Btw, good work from the mods for removing those threads very quickly. :worship:

This Mustafa is bad. :(

Nathaliia
11-26-2007, 10:38 AM
So did Mustafa56 turn out to be a dup account? :)

FluffyYellowBall
11-28-2007, 06:10 PM
yes but many users with over 500 posts still start useless threads and make annoying posts. It will just decrease it

Alonsofz
12-02-2007, 01:03 AM
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=113799

Please. :rolleyes:

Stgobaiano
12-02-2007, 02:38 AM
No. 500 Is too much, freedom of speech

Andi-M
12-06-2007, 02:58 AM
People join forums like this because they want to voice their opinion! stopping people from doing that would stop people from joining and MTF would be a very boring place!

Besides you were all newbies once.....Just because you have a zillion posts dosent mean you own the place.

calvinhobbes
12-29-2007, 04:49 PM
Moderators should be enough to erase bad or inconvenient threads, or to merge duplicate ones. I don´t see why conditions on time or number of previous posts could avoid silly or duplicate threads. To have posted 20.000 times could mean you´re a happy-triggered shit-sprayer. Who knows. Let natural selection take place. . . . .:eek::eek:

Getta
12-29-2007, 05:38 PM
...Let natural selection take place. . . .

That's it.

rob88hock
03-31-2008, 05:01 AM
i dont care. i kinda like to hear the views of people who were so mad they had to sign up as a member to to post the opinion

azza
03-31-2008, 07:12 AM
god yes!

l_mac
03-31-2008, 04:14 PM
My favourite is when they post threads we've seen 587 times before :inlove:

RagingLamb
04-26-2008, 09:34 PM
this would encourage post-whoring till you get to 500 posts, then starting countless new threads.

l_mac
04-27-2008, 12:30 AM
this would encourage post-whoring till you get to 500 posts, then starting countless new threads.

Also a 3 months delay on being able to start threads.

No, 6.

jayjay
04-27-2008, 01:25 AM
this would encourage post-whoring till you get to 500 posts, then starting countless new threads.

What she said.

A poor suggestion. The original one. As if number of posts is in anyway a reflection of tennis knowledge or sense.

Look at me, I have 585,584 posts, therefore I'm worthy of speaking here (or in this case, starting a topic of conversation) as opposed to some person with a mere 18 posts. That's just complete bollox.

It's quite simple, there are alot of people who just like to be the one to start countless threads that have either been done before, or just for the sake of some controversy with little or no originality. Get rid of them.

Someone started a thread recently, or not, I can't even remember about which threads they try to avoid or some other such bullshit. I was half tempted to go into the thread and make it explicitly clear what a complete waste of fucking time and space the thread was. However, I knew that would only continue the trend of bumping up a worthless thread, so I managed to bite my internet tongue. Just.

Monteque
04-27-2008, 05:04 AM
i dont agree AT ALL. Newbs sometimes have something good to show and let they walking around a bit in this site while they are still a newbie.

Most of them will leave ASAP from this MTF if they cannot post a thread.

Oj-Ala
04-27-2008, 08:47 PM
I voted for "NO"

If we are going to have a criteria for letting people start or not threads, then, it has to be the IQ... not the number of posts.

gaz
04-28-2008, 10:08 PM
voted no sounds like a good way to encourage spamming

Jimnik
07-13-2008, 12:10 PM
Please PLEASE can we put this under consideration.

Xavier7 is yet another one that needs to be stopped. 27 posts on this forum and 7 of them have been new threads. If everyone did this we'd have an average of 2 replies per thread.

Manon
07-13-2008, 02:10 PM
Please PLEASE can we put this under consideration.

Xavier7 is yet another one that needs to be stopped. 27 posts on this forum and 7 of them have been new threads. If everyone did this we'd have an average of 2 replies per thread.

I'm with you in this case.

Jimnik
07-15-2008, 12:05 PM
And we have another one people.

http://www.menstennisforums.com/search.php?searchid=1225768

I pray the moderators don't move that thread to GM, even though it doesn't belong in NT.

Sofonda Cox
07-15-2008, 07:23 PM
I think most of the people who troll GM have more than 500 posts - they are a disgrace.

Eden
07-15-2008, 08:49 PM
I voted no.

You won't prevent the usual GM crap with such a restriction. It doesn't matter how many posts a user has whether he is unable or unwilling to use the search function. Imo all those new threads aren't the main problem, but more the following comments of people who keep it alive just for teasing or trolling. It would be much better if just one person would answer that the thread already exists or that it has been discussed several times, asks a moderator to delete it and the case would be closed.

I don't see any need to prevent a new MTF member or someone who doesn't spend his whole life on the forum from contributing an interesting thread for GM.

Manon
07-15-2008, 11:18 PM
I voted no.



I agree if bosses find another way to stop invasion of worhles and useless threads. As Jimnik said - this Xeno... 9 threads yesterday, all themes exists for long time.

Deboogle!.
07-15-2008, 11:50 PM
Imo all those new threads aren't the main problem, but more the following comments of people who keep it alive just for teasing or trolling. It would be much better if just one person would answer that the thread already exists or that it has been discussed several times, asks a moderator to delete it and the case would be closed. I completely agree. I don't understand many GM posters' insatiable need to make snarky comments about EVERYTHING. Just ignore it, report it, and it'll be gone and no one would even really notice. But no, people feel the need to slam the person who started the thread even if there's no real reason to. It says more about those who reply than the original thread-starter, who may just be a newbie who didn't know about the search tool or couldn't get it to work.

I don't see any need to prevent a new MTF member or someone who doesn't spend his whole life on the forum from contributing an interesting thread for GM.I agree.

Just report the threads, guys. there's no better solution.

scoobs
07-16-2008, 04:40 PM
A lot of the idiocy that goes on is from posters who have more than 500 posts.

So what then.

Denaon
07-16-2008, 05:17 PM
A lot of the idiocy that goes on is from posters who have more than 500 posts.

So what then.

I think it'll be only fair to allow those that have +10,000 to start any thread in all forums...not just GM...:yeah:

That way this will let us +10000 Mtfers rule the place :rocker:

:crazy:

Manon
07-16-2008, 06:01 PM
I completely agree. I don't understand many GM posters' insatiable need to make snarky comments about EVERYTHING. Just ignore it, report it, and it'll be gone and no one would even really notice. But no, people feel the need to slam the person who started the thread even if there's no real reason to. It says more about those who reply than the original thread-starter, who may just be a newbie who didn't know about the search tool or couldn't get it to work.

I agree.

Just report the threads, guys. there's no better solution.

Nice post. Thank you.

Manon
07-16-2008, 06:03 PM
A lot of the idiocy that goes on is from posters who have more than 500 posts.

So what then.

True. But scoobs, you're mod now, no need to be that sharp. We are trying to discuss.

Deboogle!.
07-16-2008, 06:17 PM
A lot of the idiocy that goes on is from posters who have more than 500 posts.

So what then.Ain't that the truth. and also, what about the reverse - the newbies who actually have a lot to contribute or who have really valid questions about the sport or something. It's just too arbitrary.True. But scoobs, you're mod now, no need to be that sharp. We are trying to discuss.I don't think he was intending to be "sharp" I think he brought up an important point, that a lot of the worst posters on this board are people who have more than 500 posts. whether they start threads who knows but their posts are bad enough.

scoobs
07-16-2008, 11:05 PM
Not being sharp. Just succinct :)

jayjay
07-17-2008, 09:13 PM
True. But scoobs, you're mod now, no need to be that sharp. We are trying to discuss.

:lol: It's completely true and has been stated previously in the thread by a number of different people. This thread alone is evidence of it, if we are being perfectly blunt.

Black Adam
08-16-2008, 06:12 PM
How about a restriction limiting everybody to one thread a day??

Chloe le Bopper
08-17-2008, 06:22 PM
I think most of the people who troll GM have more than 500 posts - they are a disgrace.
Ding ding.

This solves nothing. There have been times in the past where a new poster, or somebody who posts infrequently, added a good discussion to the board. Not everybody who wishes to discuss tennis has the time or interest to put in 500 posts of emoticons and cheers. Their failure to spam the board as effectively as the rest of us shouldn't limit them from contributing. Yes, some new posters suck, but they are hardly the sole reason GM sucks.

Chloe le Bopper
08-17-2008, 06:24 PM
How about a restriction limiting everybody to one thread a day??
Why restrict those with good discussion ideas simply because some people are stupid? Reactions such as placing restrictions and policing everybody in a failed effort to control the minority of posters who act like idiots, is precisely why GM is absolute garbage.

Chloe le Bopper
08-17-2008, 06:27 PM
Ain't that the truth. and also, what about the reverse - the newbies who actually have a lot to contribute or who have really valid questions about the sport or something. It's just too arbitrary.I don't think he was intending to be "sharp" I think he brought up an important point, that a lot of the worst posters on this board are people who have more than 500 posts. whether they start threads who knows but their posts are bad enough.
I could have just read other people's posts and said "I agreeeeeeee!", but that would have been boring.

But yes, I agree with this one. I more or less reiterated you, and others.

Neely
08-17-2008, 08:12 PM
I think some have isolated the problem quite well: that a few really stupid threads by "newbies" are annoying, but that the posts of some poeple who ruin the better/more interesting threads are worse and that this can't be controlled at all. Ergo, to some extent, GM is only as good as its population acts.

Jimnik
09-01-2008, 02:35 PM
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?p=7580333#post7580333
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=130941


They just keep coming. :banghead:

Tankman
02-10-2009, 02:16 AM
what?

c'mon 90% of newbies post rubbish.

I represent the oldies as their virtual lawyer :p

Bring it :armed:

big_don
04-20-2009, 06:59 PM
to be fair, there are SOME people who want to post something which isn't stupid or annoying or boring.
Also if you put a limit on the post count you need for creating threads in GM, that would put alot of people off the forum altogether (may be a good thing in some cases! :rolleyes: ) because tbh, there are loads of threads in GM and it's where most of the users go to post.

scarecrows
06-20-2009, 04:17 PM
can you also ban The Oracle from starting threads?

Ilovetheblues_86
06-20-2009, 05:48 PM
Put 1.000 posts instead and then we will ahve a higher quality forum.

Action Jackson
06-20-2009, 05:50 PM
The Oracle has to be a relation of Just Cause.

Snoo Foo
06-20-2009, 05:51 PM
better if only people with less than 500 posts can start a thread, cuz most of the most mentally ill trolls and fucknecks on this site have zillions of posts :yeah:

Ilovetheblues_86
06-20-2009, 05:57 PM
Actually I think only blue(s) appreciators like truebluefan or ilovetheblues_86 should start threads.

dam0dred
07-05-2009, 01:48 AM
I think 500 is pushing it. For those of us that come to here to, you know, discuss tennis and don't hang out in the chat threads, it takes a while to hit 500.

But yes, can somebody please remove The Oracle's ability to create new threads? Kisses. x

Heners
08-20-2009, 05:00 AM
yes...

Audacity
09-30-2009, 09:36 AM
I've seen similar ideas to this implemented on other forums, and yes it does reduce useless threads.

Snowwy
10-02-2009, 03:22 PM
I've seen similar ideas to this implemented on other forums, and yes it does reduce useless threads.

But it adds to post padding by new members, soon we will have people posting posting itbl in all the threads, and is there anything more annoying than that?