Associate
Why the hell should I?To be part of the community you must participate. Get active and you’ll be back in before you know it
I was an acceptable part of the community prior to this ********
IMPORTANT: Members Market access
- Thread starter Feek
- Start date
- Status
I was an acceptable part of the community prior to this ********
So you had an absolute minimum of 250 posts in January 2012.
Now you have around 310 posts. You've made 60-70 posts in eleven years?
Requirements change. Back in 2012, we could quite easily have just removed everyone who didn't meet the new criteria but we left it open. Now, over ten years later, we've closed that loophole. I think that over ten years is a perfectly decent time span to give people a chance to actually be active and participate.
How many of the good people who posted in this thread are caught in the crossfire and are resigned to blindly accepting the allegedly reasonable rules allowing access to the MM?
How many good community members of this forum are expected to have access to the MM?
I understand that you are sure of yourself and I am also sure of myself.
I believe I am to make a good argument because someone needs to fight for a thriving MM and against retrospective punishment whereas you are defending a draconian set of rules.
If you were to poll the people here, I expect you will get a democratic answer for what the post count should be for MM access.That is an example of how big decisions should be made here.
Associate
How is it a bloody loophole if don't comment as much as your 300k
OC are fine taking my cash 1.5k + last year but hey
Associate
Someone with some common sense at least
It looks like the last time you posted outside of a buying/selling thread or the shop news threads was 2020.
If you've had nothing to "actually contribute" to the rest of the forum in three years, then it's not a hard argument to make that you're not really making up 'part of the community' in any meaningful fashion.
Soldato
I don't get all this "good" talk. Who is the arbiter of good? The rules stipulate ACTIVE.
Let's look at it this from my perspective; Why do you get access for posting 250 times 15 years ago, when I had to post 1000 times in 5 years? (And in reality that took me 9 months because I got involved).
I do feel for the people who say they read the forums every day and never post but... Ok? That's not involved, it's merely present.
So make the post count required to access the MM decay over time instead of having to retrospectively punish people?
How can you judge if they are good people if they rarely post?
How is it a punishment if they are held to the same standards as everyone else?
You have not put in the leg work to explain why making 1000 posts is an exceedingly hard task, so you can't make that claim.
The forums are not a democracy. You don't see a poll on who gets banned or not. I would say that is far more important to the actual user experience of the forums than MM access.
Because the forum rules say you should.
This is not a democracy. It never has been, it never will be. The administrators make the decisions.
Under the old stewardship, you'd probably have been banned already for the way you've posted in this thread. Fortuntately for all of us, we've moved on since those days.
It's a loophole in that people who had access kept access when the forum rules changed.
The MM rules say:
"Access to the MM is granted as a privilege to forum members who have contributed to the community. Once you have access, we expect you to continue participating in the other forums outside of MM. If it is noticed that you only post in the MM then this may be raised with you. If you no longer participate in the wider community outside of MM then we reserve the right to remove your access."
I hadn't checked @Sturm's stats. You've saved me the chore.
As already explained in this thread, we've been working on this for over a year, gradually removing access from various members. This is the seventh and final stage of the cleanup.
People were given the privilege of retaining access despite not meeting the updated access criteria a decade ago. It's on them if they've not contributed enough in the space of a decade to catch up and are now 'caught out' by the change.
The alternative was that they lost access 10 years ago, so they've enjoyed the benefit ever since then without choosing to engage with the community.
Associate
I do get where you are coming from but things a rarely that simple.
I run several groups for ex military in one group I have around 500, only a small percentage of those will post and I have several that have never posted in the 7 years they have been with me but I know it helps them just by being able to read the craic.
Not all of us are born yakkers, I know I don't post much but I am still here actively reading stuff albeit much of it is carp.
What criteria would you suggest to promote many more "good" people on here having access to the MM?
Associate
Then I shall take myself off along with my custom
No leaving posts
Associate
There does not appear to be an option to delete my account. can an admin please do for me
ty
ty
Do you see much evidence in society that people rarely pay attention to what is best for them until it's too late?
Is there an alternative to people being retrospectively punished when a new rule is deemed to be appropriate?
Soldato
I wouldn't. I can't judge the goodness of people, especially not over a forum. Neither can anyone else. I think it's reasonable to say users must be actively engaging in forum discussion to take advantage of the MM. I'd say 50 posts in the last year, plus a minimum post count, but it's not my forum.
Please do remember the forum isn't run by the shop and it'd be a shame to stop using OcUK because of a load of
- Status