I've noticed a seeming degradation in the quality of many ATS threads from the long time I spent as a non-member until now as a (new) member.
While limiting new members to 20 posts before having the ability to create a new thread outside of the Introductions forum is good, I personally feel
this limitation is a little weak.
I propose (some of these will effect me too, so, I'm not proposing anything I'd be exempt from)
1. Upping the 20 post limit to 50, 100, or even 150 before being allowed to post a new thread. This, I think would encourage a greater degree of
board participation as well as precipitate a higher learning curve for standards of conduct, and what's expected in quality posting.
2. Limiting new thread posts by newer, freshman members under 500-1000 posts to one thread a day.
3. Staged access to new thread posting where initially new thread posts by newer freshmen, unseasoned members are restricted to the Freshman forum,
member art, general chit chat, rant, and other areas where quality of posts isn't necessarily of highest priority.
4. Exceptions: Should a new, less seasoned member have valid, well researched, legitimate information that's well documented, sourced and linked,
regardless their post count, with Admin or moderator approval said topic can be posted and/or moved to appropriate forum.
These, I think would reengage a higher quality level of posting as opposed to the frequent duplicates, 2 or 3 sentence poll question speculations
where "I had this Idea ...", or "I was just thinking ...", and any of the other assorted Facebook style posts that seem to be a more frequent
occurrence, especially among less seasoned members.
These also, I think, would assist in giving the moderators an easier time in freeing up time from having to monitor for duplicate posts and other
trivia typically engaged in by newer members.
5. Sources, and links: require in some threads similar to breaking news, links to sources, ex-text, summary, etc, at least with less seasoned
members under 500-1000 posts as a means to train and enable them into enacting better habits of research, documentation, and sourcing.
All this could be retro-active, effecting everyone, or enacted to just effect new members from date of green light. I'm more in favor of retroactive
action from the standpoint that post quality could see an immediate effect.
In criticism of myself and this proposal, yes, this post doesn't have any ex-text, link to sources, or documentation to support the observation that I
feel post quality needs improvement, nor any data suggesting or supporting any of the proposed items would actually work.
It is, in fact one of those "I was just thinking ..." type posts that I myself have criticized, however, the suggestions I've outlined would effect me
were they implemented.
edit on 17-4-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)