Limiting access to the "Members Only" forum

Post Reply New Topic

The members only discussion area and the mature issues discusssion areas are areas here that are only accessable to members of WP. Since privacy issues made the photo thread be moved to the members only thread, I'd like to raise another concern about the members only area

It's easy, just too easy for someone to create and account and gain access to the members only area with out even making a post. I checked through the members list and saw that there were 541 registered members who have never even made a post.

First off, I think the board should have some kind of feature that deletes inactive accounts (what constitutes an "inactive account" could be decided later).

And second, to keep people out of the members only area, I think a good policy to implement would be to require either for a member to post in "getting to know each other" or an all-around minimum number of posts to be made before a member can get into the "members only" area.

The point of all this is: Is a member who dosen't post really a member?

Yessss, I've had some concerns lately about providing a 'freakshow' or 'material' for people. I put it out of my mind because I enjoy the site and the company here, but I think perhaps there comes a time in a website's life when it becomes necessary to make such changes as Scoots suggests.

It might also be an idea to say that all material here is copyright of the author or of Wrongplanet and unathorised use is illegal, or something.

The fact that when I one day I was
looking around for interesting topics
of the day, Latenight, I ran across a
random on people sexually abused
telling their inner thoughts. I being
a genuine person(HFA) wouldn't
want a freakshow view peepshow on
this particularly sensitive topic, and
being that a genuine member has
genuine issues, that should be a
requirement. we are not a petting zoo.

Example:
55 Viewers
25 logins.

The idea of number of posts minimium
is really simple, not complicating,
YOU POST, YOU HAVE PRIVILEDGES.
not the petting zoo peep show.
I have not said anything yet, until now
when I realized it wasn't just me seeing
the peepshow viewer. This also
applies to the members posting overall
list!

I have another issue. I tried getting
into the chat space and my M.S.EXpress
wasn't cooperating and I haven't been
able to get in. Example:
25 people logged in....
5 actually in the main forum on home page.

Thanks for listening and considering.
Ghosthunter

I recall seeing a few members in the chatroom wo don't have any posts in the forums. Maybe some people just like the chatroom better?

It's more like "Outlook Express" is
asking for something that I am not
sure what it is.

Is there other ways of getting into
the chatroom?

I've never seen any members in chat, I'm probably in the wrong timezone, but I went there twice and no-one was there.

as this is an internet site, anyone can access it - isn't that the point? if people ARE using this as a "peepshow", well, that's the world wide web for you. it's a risk.

however, "for members only" should be just that. one way round it is for members to have a second password, needed to access the area. i don't know how possible this is (not being a computer whizz), but is there a way admins/mods could assign passwords to known members? or acceptable ones - members could recommend or vouch for people not known to the admins/mods. just a suggestion - could it work? (i'm not trying to push more work onto admins and mods, btw - i know it's hard work already!)

This is a complicated issue, and will take some working out I think.

There does need to be some way of restricting access to genuine members I agree, but the question is how to tell if someone who doesn't post is genuine? We have had months pass before some members feel comfortable posting - should we exclude them from members areas until they do so? That would hardly be fair.

Two other points - first regarding the chatroom. I have also come across chatters who don't post, but are clearly still members of the community.

Ghosthunter, the chat applet should open in your browser without trouble if it is Java enabled - you can also connect using an IRC program such as xchat, mIRC or Trillian. The server address for connecting directly is irc.freenode.net, channel #wrongplanet. If you need help, feel free to PM me.

Postperson, the best time for you to catch the chat room active is in the mornings. friday-monday tends to be busiest, sunday morning your time in particular.

My second point relates to the number of people logged in - the 'lurkers' often join after a while, or are members just checking the boards.

Dunc

ok, thanks dunc - just about the copyright issue, is there already a statement about ownership/use of material on this site somewhere? I must admit, I haven't looked.

I was reading here for about two weeks before I became a member, first so I could decide if I liked the site and then because I was trying to think of a username!

I agree with some of the ideas though, especially that people should introduce themselves to be able to gain access to the members only boards. Those people who take a long time before they can feel comfortable to be able to post will still be able to read all of the other boards until they do.

But I do not agree that people should need to have a sponsor to vouch for them. I discovered this site and do not know anybody on it and so would not have been able to join if that was the case. This I reckon is not an uncommon situation, and it is a very supportive site and so to restrict it in this way would damage that.

Michael.

From what I see, I think there are enough restrictions on the members only and mature adults groups. The other groups are open enough to allow for lurkers to see what the website/forum is about before jumping in. I think I spent a good week looking at the forums before registering myself.

As far as persons who register but do not post, I do not think that is a problem either. The registering part is website wide and not simply for the forums. Many people may join for other reasons than to post in the forums.

Finally, for those worried about privacy/peepers looking for freak shows, if someone wants to look, they will find a way. By adding more restrictions, we will encourage those that want to look at the forums simply for a laugh to be less honest with themselves. Besides, once the novelty wears off, they will move on anyways.

Just my $0.02US worth.

I wandered around several sites before plucking up courage to participate.

For a long time it just didn't seem natural to me although I was still able to get something positive from reading the posts of others.

Still to this day I find chatrooms a bit uncomfortable ~ it is a bit like jumping into a pool, as soon as you are in you are supposed to start 'swimming'.

Also I find it difficult to initiate discussion although I have learnt that I like responding to the posts of others.

I understand feelings of those who worry about the privacy of our forums. Sometimes I feel the same way, and this is the reason why I stay anonymous. But I agree with ljbouchard and others. Closing the forums (even only some of them) or requiring invites might frighten some people who may want very much to socialize, but are too shy to actively participate. From my own experience - first aspie discussion board I came across was Aspie Hangout. To join one was required to post an introduction, in a forum that was the only one available to non-members. An introduction to an unknown crowd, because I couldn't access any discussions not being a member. I turned away from that closed door. I wouldn't like people coming to Wrong Planet, reaching to us, only to see a closed door. I prefer 50 NT "freak show" lurkers laughing at my weirdness than turning away 1 aspie.

I had no clue that this would be such a controverisal idea. My whole idea was not set up invites or judging people for worthiness before letting them in, or blocking the forums all together unless they post and intro themselves.

No, I was just suggesting something to help ensure that people who read the members only area should in fact be there to begin with.

I'm not overly concerned about it right now anyways, I just suggested it as maybe another layer of security since I went through the member list and saw so many no-poster members.

If I upset anyone, I profusely apologize.

Maybe the solution is to use "karma" to open the doors to various rooms. People would start at zero and earn karma quickly by participating or slowly just by making return visits and reading the discussions. Each discussion group coul d have it's own karma requirement so that new arrivals would have lots of places to explore, but more personal data would only become available over time.

The thresholds don't have to be set very high, as anyone who's searching for exploitative reasons will probably not come back often enough to get good karma. People who misbehave could have their karma removed rather than being banned.

The problem with the Karma idea is that someone determined to work around it will.

The members only area requires you to be a member. Beyond that, I do not think that there should be any other requirement. It was that requirement that lead me to become a member but if more road blocks would have been put into my place, I do not think I would have stayed.