A platform to ask difficult questions ..
Date: Sun, 08/31/2008 - 22:00
1. Transparency creates trust.
2. These difficult questions act as constructive criticism and allow us to become better.
But the current system that we have is not working since an anonymous poster can come to our forums and use multiple identities to carpet bomb our forum with multiple insinuations without proofs.
I suggest we make certain changes to require a person to have:
1. An identity
2. A reputation
before being able to make insinuations. This is because when a person with an identity and reputation raises difficult questions they probably are true assessments and deserve our interest and attention.
In my discussions with some of the moderators three of the possible options are:
1. Make the complete forum a members only forum: This has two disadvantages that a lot of people have valid questions about payday loan companies that they will not ask if they were made to register. Since:
A. They will think that registering in the forum may reveal their identity to the payday loan companies and then they can be personally sued. DebtCC is proud not to have revealed the identity of even a single poster even when it would have been in our favor to reveal the identity but not all people who come to the forums know of our track record.
B. They might think that they will start getting spam in their email. DebtCC has never sent a spam in the last 5 year of operation but then new people do not know of our track record.
2. Start a new sub forum called "Members only forum" and any topic with negative energy or insinuations in it will be moved to the "Members only forum"
I think it is reasonable for us to expect people to register in the forum and become members if they are going to post insinuations in the forums.
3. Start a new sub forum called "100+ post Members only forum" and any topic with negative energy or insinuations in it will be moved to the the "100+ post Members only forum"
I think it MIGHT be reasonable for us to expect people to help others in the community by making at least 100 posts and only when they have proven themselves in the community and gained some reputation in the community should we allow them to post insinuations. Since after a person has gained a basic reputation their insinuations can be dealt with more seriously.
Let me know your suggestions on which option to go with. I personally prefer option 3.
Quote:3. Start a new sub forum called "100+ post Members only fo
Quote:
3. Start a new sub forum called "100+ post Members only forum" and any topic with negative energy or insinuations in it will be moved to the the "100+ post Members only forum" |
This would be my preference also. It's not unusual for Internet communities to have hidden forums which require registration to view and participate.
Quote:1. Make the complete forum a members only forum: This has
Quote:
1. Make the complete forum a members only forum: This has two disadvantages that a lot of people have valid questions about payday loan companies that they will not ask if they were made to register |
This is the only forum I am a member of that does not require its members to register. I think that would cut down on the spam as well as make every poster accountable for what they post. Would it possible to make a section for "anonymous" posts to assist the PDL questions?
I don't know that we need to change the system because of one pe
I don't know that we need to change the system because of one person.
I think it would hurt some people if they felt they had to register first before posting. I know the issue has been looked at before, and has always been decided to not require registration before posting.
I feel that the situation is being over complicated. I think things should just contniue as they are, it wasn't broke before, so why fix it?
I agree with Goudah on this one. We've discussed this issue man
I agree with Goudah on this one. We've discussed this issue many times in the past, and the general consensus was always that we should allow guest posting, because there are many people that will not post questions if they have to join, therefore, many will go without much-needed help.
We had problems with some guests getting downright nasty in the past, so we started having guest posts approved by a Mod or Admin prior to allowing them to appear on the forums. This has helped, to some extent, though there is still a good deal of spam getting through.
I think we have a good system - it keeps us hopping taking care of the spam and those guests who don't have the best intentions when posting, but for the most part, I think we're doing well with the system we have.
I respect what you guys have said, but imho we need to do a bett
I respect what you guys have said, but imho we need to do a better job of weeding out the guests who are just out to stir the pot on the forums compared to those who are really coming here for help.
And what's wrong with having both options: registering or not registering, but sweetening the pot for those who have taken the time to register by opening more parts of the boards to them? I think this would cut down on the post deletion/forum locking that we all have had to do--AND the drama, which we just don't need any more of.
I do think that this forum is a benefit to many people who would
I do think that this forum is a benefit to many people who would not be willing to ask their questions if they had to register. However, I definitely don't think that anonymous posters should be allowed to post insinuations under multiple identities.
The problem with either option number two or option three though is that if a guest is the OP of a thread, and someone wishing to cause trouble comes along with insinuations, then that thread is going to get moved--meaning that the guest won't be able to view answers to their post anyway.
Sorry, I can't think of any better options though . . .
I also want to point out that if Vikas were to change the system
I also want to point out that if Vikas were to change the system now, it would look like it was in response to the recent nastyness. It would make it look like he was trying to hush people up, and make it look like there is something to the nasty accusations.
I think that leaving the system how it is and just editing or moving future disturbances to the MOD forum is the best way to handle it.
It isn't uncommon practice for Internet based communities to kee
It isn't uncommon practice for Internet based communities to keep specific forums hidden and only accessible to registered members, usually they are referred to as member benefits.
When a person becomes a registered member it does not mean they are revealing their true identity, they are just as anonymous after they register as before. Very FEW people (if any at all) use their real names when they register in a forum which allows 'screen names'. Anyone who registers here may opt out of a referral or free consultation, it isn't a requirement to become a member.
Quote:
I also want to point out that if Vikas were to change the system now, it would look like it was in response to the recent nastyness. It would make it look like he was trying to hush people up, and make it look like there is something to the nasty accusations. |
I think it's a little too late for that anyhow, this topic alone could easily be misconstrued in that manner anyhow. If it were me, I would definitely do everything within my power to keep the negativity out of these forums, people are going to think what they want to think either way.
If things stay open, then it shows the community that Vikas is n
If things stay open, then it shows the community that Vikas is not afraid of what people say. If they close the forums to guest posters in response to what happened, it gives the impression that Vikas is trying to hide something and silence people.
I really don't think it's "fear" at this point, I would venture
I really don't think it's "fear" at this point, I would venture to say it's more like protecting the best interest of the community, vikas and his family.
I can say one thing for certain, and I'm quite sure many people will agree, if it were my name being used maliciously, I would do whatever it took to protect my best interest.
Innocent until proven guilty? Not in this case, how unfortunate.
Vikas will do what is best. This is not the first time some
Vikas will do what is best.
This is not the first time something like this has happened. The more of a big deal it is made, the bigger it gets. It's best to just ignore and more on.
If it were my name, and I was the owner of the site, I would take things very carefully. It's not such an easy choice to make. I wouldn't be acting irrationally out of fear or emotion. I would think about what the consequences of such changes would be.
I trust that Vikas will make the right decision for this site.
I do not think that we should allow one malicious poster create
I do not think that we should allow one malicious poster create massive change. That to me is like negotiating with terrorists. If we are steadfast in our ways it will be more of a discouragment to malicious behavior. The intent of terrorists is the same on a much grander scale, to disturb the peace that should come with freedom. Never let anyone steal your peace or they start taking little bits of your freedom.
i trust that whatever is best for the board will happen. i've ha
i trust that whatever is best for the board will happen. i've had a lot to deal with and have seemed to have missed something (thankfully, i supose, since it didn't sound too good). but i want to say that i have a great deal of respect for this board and want it to do everything it can to continue helping people :)
