Registration is disabled? - General

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39634474]If you're going to perma people for system abuse you might as well perma people for breaking rules though. I mean what prominent internet forums let you vote people into membership?[/QUOTE] Well what prominent internet forum makes people pay for membership? SA, the only one I know about. Just because not everybody uses it doesn't make it bad.

[QUOTE=ojcoolj;39634111]Nobody should have to pay anything just to join a silly forum Name one good forum that does that[/QUOTE] sa

Ok: 1. Own Garry's Mod and get free forum access or 2. Pay $1 for access. If you can't pay $1 to join a forum (or find someone to pay for you, I would totally pay for a person I knew... it's a dollar) you're probably not going to be a good community member.

[QUOTE=KorJax;39634465] You say no one will but the refugee camp works perfectly fine with this. [B]Gold members can post in refugee camp[/B] but if they don't do so in a constructive manner they get perma'd. This would be the exact same thing, but with the added caveat that if you just rate spam then all the gold members involved in the spam will be perma'd and/or the mod will just reverse the 7 day auto registration ban.[/QUOTE] Uuuuh you can? I just tried responding to a post and it said permissions denied. But anyway, the problem is that it isn't mandatory. I sure as fuck wouldn't go to the new member camp just to try to weed out the bad users from the good ones. So unless moderators forced people to go rate new users (like a "rate new users to get posting abilities" sort of stick), which would fucking suck ass, I don't think hardly anyone would go out of their way to rate new users.

But I thought we more or less decided paying was bad And basically saying you are banned, see if people like you to get unbanned kinda doesn't feel welcoming. If you have a graymf, then you basically say "hey we get a lot of people trying to join, tell us why you should get access to the entire forum"

[QUOTE=DrJenkins;39634173]Problem: Shit tons of shit posters joining to make Facepunch shit. Right? Problem 2: We are the official support community for Garry's Mod. Solution: Allow new users to ONLY post in the Garry's Mod Sections until they've been either:- a- Approved as a good user by a moderator b- Got 200 posts Additional: Don't let them buy gold either.[/QUOTE] I don't know if I could make 200 (quality) posts in the GMod section when brand new, not within a few months anyway.

[QUOTE=KorJax;39634528]Well what prominent internet forum makes people pay for membership? SA, the only one I know about. Just because not everybody uses it doesn't make it bad.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://puu.sh/24Gyy/f8f2cb8d2e[/IMG] It's a system that works well for them. Would it work for FP? No, but that doesn't mean approving people by how they post in a closed-off area beforehand will. Would you like it if you went to the U.S. as an immigrant and they imprisoned you until enough people though you wouldn't be a stealing, murdering deliquent?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39634549] If you can't pay $1 to join a forum (or find someone to pay for you, I would totally pay for a person I knew... it's a dollar) you're probably not going to be a good community member.[/QUOTE] "I have money to spend on internet forums so i'm a decent member of society and will contribute positively to the forum" will hardly ever work. I know boatloads of people with money to spend on useless shit and they would get permbanned so fast from these forums it would break records.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;39634478]gold members haven't been able to post in the rc for a while caused too many problems, i think a rating system where it recommends to mods but they still have the final say is better[/QUOTE] I just figured the gold members being able to contribute wouldn't make it a big hassle to get mods to approve applicants, since they could do the work for you. Worst case scenario you get a bunch of people who aren't totally constructive approved and the spambots/alts would most certainly never get approved, which really isn't that big of a deal (maybe in this sense you only need 30 agrees to get approved but 60/90 disagrees to get declined). Best case scenario we get gold members who actually get involved in building the community to a point where people who aren't all that bad join up, we never have spambots/alt spam, and the mods (including the 3 new ones that only have moderator status on those forums) make sure it all runs smoothly.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39634572]"I have money to spend on internet forums so i'm a decent member of society and will contribute positively to the forum" will hardly ever work. I know boatloads of people with money to spend on useless shit and they would get permbanned so fast from these forums it would break records.[/QUOTE] Well, it's not infallible, and really, no system is, but there are methods to stop repeat users from joining. And if they want to fund the forum while they're at it, more power to them.

log in with steam. (then) must make 10 posts in General Discussion (or) buy gold for instant access edit: this could cause spam, didn't think that through

[QUOTE=legolover122;39634572]"I have money to spend on internet forums so i'm a decent member of society and will contribute positively to the forum" will hardly ever work. I know boatloads of people with money to spend on useless shit and they would get permbanned so fast from these forums it would break records.[/QUOTE] But each time they register Garry makes money if he permabans the idiot. I don't think I'd care if someone made hundreds of alt accounts on my website to spam or be an idiot if I got $1 each time.

[QUOTE=KorJax;39634574]I just figured the gold members being able to contribute wouldn't make it a big hassle to get mods to approve applicants, since they could do the work for you. Worst case scenario you get a bunch of people who aren't totally constructive approved and the spambots/alts would most certainly never get approved, which really isn't that big of a deal (maybe in this sense you only need 30 agrees to get approved but 60/90 disagrees to get declined). Best case scenario we get gold members who actually get involved in building the community to a point where people who aren't all that bad join up, we never have spambots/alt spam, and the mods (including the 3 new ones that only have moderator status on those forums) make sure it all runs smoothly.[/QUOTE] IMO, the grays should never actually see who approved them I don't know why, but i think a graymf would work better less sense of "you suck" and more of "we get a lot prove your worth"

I think you guys forgot when Garry said he definitely doesn't want to charge for accounts.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39634604]Well, it's not infallible, and really, no system is, but there are methods to stop repeat users from joining. And if they want to fund the forum while they're at it, more power to them.[/QUOTE] But why choose a half effective method when there are methods that will do the job better and be nearly autonomous? I feel the steam worth idea is pretty OK. Another idea would be to make a new class of user or something. Grey users, whatever you wanna call it. They can only post inside threads and cannot post pictures or embed video. They get automatically upgraded to blue member as soon as they hit 100-200 posts AND (not or) a certain account age. Maybe a month. That way, anyone can join without a steam account, free, and if they try to spam in forums the mods can just permban them and no extra topics will be spammed.

[QUOTE=Cowabanga;39634645]I think you guys forgot when Garry said he definitely doesn't want to charge for accounts.[/QUOTE] I don't think he wants to punish potential users right out of the gate either

3 posts a day to get in at a month with 100 6 for 200? that's spammy as heck I would prefer that if you are gray, you can't post in blue and up keeps all the shit in one place

ideas so far 1. Pay. 2. Vote in. 3. Autoban, prove your worth in RC 4. Lurk 5. Post before full approval. 6. Once a day/week post, must get X amount of good ratings etc My own idea: Light blue unapproved members that get all forums after they get X amount of ratings they are approved. If they get nothing but dumbs they are bans. (about 50-100 good ratings, or dumbs). A fairly even split raises amount needed slightly. Additionally, you must activate via steam.

How about we have new register members by having them kill another member to take their place?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39634625]But each time they register Garry makes money if he permabans the idiot. I don't think I'd care if someone made hundreds of alt accounts on my website to spam or be an idiot if I got $1 each time.[/QUOTE] We aren't trying to make money here though. We are trying to filter users. Any sort of fee will turn the vast majority of people away. Good people will be turned away and persistent people will keep paying and getting banned and nothing will get done to solve the problem at hand, which isn't to make money, it's to try to stop spammers.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39634743]We aren't trying to make money here though. We are trying to filter users. Any sort of fee will turn the vast majority of people away. Good people will be turned away and persistent people will keep paying and getting banned and nothing will get done to solve the problem at hand, which isn't to make money, it's to try to stop spammers.[/QUOTE] Restricting users from the beginning is going to turn away plenty of legitimately good users, in the same way that making payments to join will.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39634743]We aren't trying to make money here though. We are trying to filter users. Any sort of fee will turn the vast majority of people away. Good people will be turned away and persistent people will keep paying and getting banned and nothing will get done to solve the problem at hand, which isn't to make money, it's to try to stop spammers.[/QUOTE] A whole lot less 'good people' will be turned away than bad ones. And the point is the time that is spent combating bad posters is rewarded monetarily.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;39634762]Restricting users from the beginning is going to turn away plenty of legitimately good users, in the same way that making payments to join will.[/QUOTE] Not being able to post topics and no embedding images is far less restrictive than paying is, and will turn off far fewer users from the forums than paying to access would. The steam account worth system wouldn't even be using restrictions (outside of the steam account). Just have a game or two worth like 15 bucks total and they can make one account using that login. If they get permbanned, they have to buy more games on another steam account if they really want to make an account.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39634801] will turn off far fewer users from the forums than paying to access would.[/QUOTE] uh that's the point

I think checking if someone own's GMod or a small fee is a pretty good idea, but there should still be a way to ask questions before buying GMod.

OR how about we keep the same system as now there really havent been problems with it

I think the best, most realistic way to filter out idiots who don't know what they're doing is to force someone to read the rules. The SCP Foundation wiki did a thing where there was a keyword embedded in the rules and guidelines and they had to include it in their application. Since registration is a sort of automatic application, make someone write which rule number is "don't flame" or something similar, which will filter out a lot of spambots and impatient retards who are going to break the rules.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39634885]uh that's the point[/QUOTE] We aren't trying to turn away people though. We are trying to reduce spammers. [QUOTE=garry;39630319]It's mainly all the spergers that keep re-registering. But this stops the spambots too so it's all good.[/QUOTE] Yes. Charging money would have some effect. But there are better solutions that don't require people to pay. Like I said before, garry isn't trying to make more money, he's trying to eliminate multiple account registering spammers.

[QUOTE=legolover122;39635021]We aren't trying to turn away people though. We are trying to reduce spammers. Yes. Charging money would have some effect. But there are better solutions that don't require people to pay. Like I said before, garry isn't trying to make more money, he's trying to eliminate multiple account registering spammers.[/QUOTE] then the most obvious solution is steams sign in you don't have to pay the forum and buying a game even if you're in mexico isn't THAT hard really. No ones going to have 100+ steam accounts either. I have two steam accounts but really, outside of 2 I seriously cannot see what the point is.

Integrate the rating system into the vetting process. Set it up so if a new user gets a certain number of dumbs (or other negative ratings) in a certain period of time they're automatically banned, but can post in the refugee camp to be unbanned just in case people were gaming the rating system or rating him dumb just because they disagree. I'd also suggest keeping the actual criteria for the ban secret so it's harder to game it. Maybe even include a random delay between the rating limit being reached and the autoban so people can't figure out how it works.