| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, David Laswell writes:
> In lugnet.admin.suggestions, David Eaton writes:
> > Huh-- I had actually thought that posting setup was that way by design. I
> > recall way back when Auczilla was around, someone saying that it was
> > specifically designed to be tricky to sign up for. Hence, only people who
> > were "truly serious" about it would have the perseverance to actually get on
> > the Auczilla list. And I was under the impression that Lugnet was the same
> > way-- it's not immediately obvious how to sign up, meaning that only "real
> > fans" will sign up and post.
>
> Even if that had been the intent, it would always hold the possibility
> of backfiring.
And of course that's precisely why I'm leery of the system. I can see the
logic behind it, but it runs the risk of excluding people who misinterpret
the system. It's been a long-standing problem where people have been
confused about how to sign up for posting privilages, and similarly for
membership. People tend to think (as would I initially) that membership ==
posting privilages.
> Another problem with that would be that there's a very good reason for
> wanting to do something like that with an auction website, since scammers
> are more likely to be turned away by overly restrictive sign-up
> requirements,
Really? I'd tend to think that you'd want to increase your customer base as
much as possible. I mean, sure it allows people to throw in phony bids and
whatnot, but that can be dealt with; particularly since Auczilla was a
'single-auction-at-a-time' type deal. Top-most bidder didn't reply after X
days? Go to the next highest bidder. For some place like Ebay, that's more
touchy-- since they use proxy bidding, and they've got crazy amounts of
users and auctions, requiring LOADS more man-hours be spent on issues of
this nature.
Similar to Lugnet's posting-authentication, I'd personally err on the side
of niceness until it became a problem; preferably with a solution on standby.
> but doing it with an online LEGO fan community has the
> negative side effect of making it seem like it's a group of elitist snobs,
> and that can only hurt the overall LEGO fan community by putting them at
> odds with each other instead of encouraging them to cooperate.
The fact that Lugnet doesn't publicize posting privilage documentation a bit
more proactively has always puzzled me. The only reason I could possibly
imagine is that it was difficult by design. I mean, membership is publicized
on the front page, and there's even a little "Info" link which would be a
*PERFECT* place to describe the difference between posting setup and
membership. Or maybe have it under some other link on the homepage. It's
also not in Cary Clark's Lugnet FAQ (which might be another place newbie's
might look), though that's no fault of Lugnet's. But after a bit of looking,
you *can* find it as a link under the news top page, which is a little
harder to notice, but logically makes sense, I spose.
I think I personally found the posting setup form for the first time by
attempting to respond to a thread, which in turn told me I had to sign up
for posting privilages...
DaveE
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Rest easy, David, we're going to be fixing this once and for all soon. :-) (...) AucZILLA had proxy bidding too. And the e-mail list wasn't a single-auction-at-a-time deal; you stayed on the list, with all your settings preserved from auction (...) (22 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) I certainly did. I can't recall how many people told me what I understood as "you don't have to pay for membership", but the member sign-up page clearly stated that there was a $10 minimum. (...) It sounds like that specific concern is at the (...) (22 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Even if that had been the intent, it would always hold the possibility of backfiring. I've been a read-only lurker for almost two years now, and every once in a while I'd e-mail someone a response to their LUGNET post if I felt it was (...) (22 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
53 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
