How do we class PL members as "trusted members"

[Doc]

What I was trying to say Andy, is it would be wrong for anybody to put themselves forward.

For instance; How the hell could I consider myself to be respected when I don't have the first idea what other members of this forum think about me.

EDIT: secret ballot is probably the only way

[Laserman532]

i was kind of after serious views from people here as this really will help me/admin

if you read between the lines, there is a wealth of knowledge in my post. The European community have pretty much sacrificed their freedoms and liberty and sovereignty and for that live under constant surveillance under the guise of a free society. I for one don't play that game.

I respect and support admin to allow or censure anything related to PL, it is his property, it is his right and I would defend his rights to him having total control of his property.

However, we have freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and right to bear arms granted to us by our constitution. If a forum can be strong armed or controlled via threats when nothing illegal is being done we have already succumbed to a dictatorship. The interest of public safety dosn't wash with me...if that were the case, ban automobiles.

Information is free and should remain so. If the information dosnt appear on this forum, it will on others. If the internet can become controlled, you might as well get in line at the slaughter house because you are nothing and only the people who have power, will have power.

"trusted member"??? I have seen trusted members shoot dangerous levels of laser radiation into a crowded dance floor. Im all for control...as long as I am the controller.

Do you want to live on a Prison Planet? http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-bill...-internet.html

Homie don't play dat shit.

[ElektroFreak]

It sounds to me a bit like an old boys club, and having been here before, can say it only leads to gaping divides in the membership of the forum, creating resentment, arguments, sabotage, etc (ok, so no real change...)

It also places a requirement on 'someone' to manage it ongoing, and deal with the barrage of people PMing and petitioning.

All in all, it'll just control this forum, so people will go elsewhere for it.

Can you tell I'm not in favour...?



Mind you, with all the 'trusted' members in one place, perhaps the regular members will have to read less 'spouting' from the veterans....

a WISE, WISE man hath spoken..


And Pat, that's brilliant and sums up how I feel perfectly.

[mophead]

This is my view only but a trusted member is someone who has been on the forum for at least 6 months or a year, regularly posts, has been to laser meets or met other forum members.

I don’t think just a post count of x makes a person a trusted member.

Personally, post count means nothing. zero, zip, zilch, Nothing. I know people on forums with very high post counts and an inverse relationship to intelligence.

I agree with being on the board for a time. I really agree on having met people in person either at a LEM or otherwise. I think it would help alot. I realize that some people can't make it to LEM's.

EDIT: Hit post before done typing...... Any forum I have been on and/or admin'd. "Trusted members", in every case i've seen, creates a split in the membership that in 50% of those cases - lead to the demise of the forum.

[ElektroFreak]

There's no good option here when it comes to limited access. No matter what perfectly good, trustworthy people will be excluded. I think that the decision should be made by one individual: Admin.

[norty303]

a WISE, WISE man hath spoken..

There you go, casting aspertions again....


How about this....

We set up an alternative forum entirely, just for 'the colour which must not be spoken' (what film does that remind me of...?)

Could even have links in our signatures so people could find easily... we could call it 'FloatonMexican' or something (nothing against the Mexicans btw, it just rhymes...)

Then its not the Janitors problem.


(btw - this is also a bad idea, been here, done this too.....)

[ltaudi1]

I couldn't agree more, its a shame there is no way to view raw usage, I have spoken with many form members via the phone emails and such, been a forum lurker since 2006 and I have barely 50 posts. I am more of a reader and less of a talker due to anxiety and have learned its better to listen to people who are gods of knowledge compared to me, rather than spout out what I think. So for my hundreds of hours of reading and countless spent dollars building and trying everything out for my own, make me less of a forum member than someone who babbles relentlessly and drives up "posts". Its something that should not be taken lightly, and I believe this forum will make just and accurate decisions that are for the good of our community. Just kinda wanted to add my two cents. Plus it gave me an extra score point should we go that direction.

[norty303]

I'm a firm believer in the spouting actually, at least you get corrected quicker.

Put it all out there, listen to the corrections, then re-absorb. Better than carrying round the rubbish, being unsure.

[Laserman532]

I'm a firm believer in the spouting actually, at least you get corrected quicker.

Put it all out there, listen to the corrections, then re-absorb. Better than carrying round the rubbish, being unsure.

I go for the balanced approach...50% supply useful information, 50% drama or useless information for comedic relief. 0% learning (because I already know everything) I am a legend in my own mind

[drlava]

I disagree with the concept of 'trusted members'.. it would probably just lead to a rift. Plus, if someone wants to infiltrate, they can and will. A user agreement/liability disclaimer for forum membership might be more appropriate