Well if it's really a good feature, then people will use it. If it's not, then we don't need it. I would almost certainly use it. That's the problem. It's good for the existing users (very good) but not for the new ones. That said I thought we were talking about ignore/mute/hush and if it's just ignore that's better. HOWEVER, isn't it much more elegant to just pop a little thing up that says, "Hey, new user of <7 days, you aren't allowed to post yet because we want you to acclimate. We encourage you to read posts, comment intelligently and make friends. After a week you can begin posting." mk, insomniasexx, kleinbl00 - thoughts?
I'm just going to keep linking to past discussions apparently. What Hubski can learn from "old-timey" forums So this amazing post by doesntgolf had so many good talking points but this one specifically got a lot of discussion going: Responses: The other day, mk made it so that users that haven't completed a hubwheel can only send a single PM every 10 minutes, which I think is great. Similarly, I think it'd be great if new users couldn't submit a new post until they've commented 10 (or 25 or some other amount) of times.
It's my opinion that restricting someone's ability to post until they've commented is a bad idea. Some of my favorite content on the site comes from users that rarely comment. For instance, scrimetime. -The guy might as well have been born a mute, he rarely comments but the links he posts are quality and I can usually count on them to be something I'd like to share. -There's a lot of value in that.
-thenewgreen I think this is a fantastic idea right off the bat. Now I'm going to go try and think up reasons why it sucks, but it feels so right to me. (EDIT: Already found good counterpoints in the discussion. Still digging the idea though)
-ecib4. To the extent we can get away with it, I'd rather not decide how people use the site, but let the users decide who to follow and share, or ignore.
-mkNew users limits No opinion on this, as I have no idea what new user misbehaviour is like. What I would say thought is that currently, while operating from a fairly tight member base, the balance should be tipped towards encouraging new users rather than freezing them out.
-istaraThis is the point I disagree most in your list of propositions. I remember when i first signed up, i actually posted links BEFORE commenting, but the comments and reactions to what I posted led me to stay. Many users rarely or even never comment, but post great links. So if i'm a new user and REALLY want to post something, I'll probably type out 10 low quality comments just to be able to post... Which will actually decrease the overall quality of Hubski since the main appeal are the thoughtful comments.
-elizabeth
Okay, interesting. What I'm saying though, is that the idea I came up with in thirty seconds of thinking that probably isn't very good is better than the alternative (kb's idea) in my opinion. His feels too much like sneaky shadowbanning. I'd prefer to be up-front with new users if we actually go through with something like a time-sensitive posting block.
This is an interesting way of looking at it and I don't agree or disagree. In fact, I'm still out on whether or not kb's idea is good or bad. It isn't transparent but it's also not global in the sense that any one person or persons has control over the global feed. It would be a way for a single user to edit what is shown in their global feed in that moment. If done as a toggle, it would be less powerful that ignoring a user as it would act more like a filter than an action you take against people. The thing that bothers me most about not allowing new users to post, and maybe this is just me, is that forums have done that. They've also shown on every thread how long a user has been around, given them titles for being around longer and being more active. But when you join a new forum, you can't do shit, you feel like a n00b, and, if the forum has been around for a while, there is no way you can ever compete with the top users who have been around forever. By nature, humans are competitive and when I see "most amazing user ever. 5838392 karma. joined 1029 days ago. ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆" it makes me want to make my numbers bigger. But I can't. And that inspires hopelessness and makes it more likely that I won't even stick around and comment and post because there's no way I can ever catch up. By not showing these things next to every users post/comment, it doesn't inspire that competitiveness/hopelessness and I think people are more likely to stick around become part of the community. I may be wrong, but there are a couple forums that I really could've liked but just didn't feel like spending the energy trying to get to a point where I had enough shit not to be seen as a n00b. I also never want Hubski to feel unwelcoming to new users. Ever.His feels too much like sneaky shadowbanning.
elizabeths reply at the bottom is spot on. People will comment meaningless drivel to get to the ability to post. Spot on. It's the beginning of the end if we ever implement such a thing.
And again here I do disagree. Hush, mute, and ignore are great features. I love that I have them. I have ignored one user, muted two users, and hushed three of them. Just because they are great features do not mean that I am using them all the time. I get hush/ignore/mute guilt. It's not an easy decision for me, I hate to feel like I am filtering out things without knowing what I am filtering. You really have to bother me before I use one of these features. Other users implement them with impunity, as is their right, and just because we use those features differently doesn't mean I think either way is better. I think it's all a matter of personality. I think thenewgreen and insom and lil and such people that I named in my post usually love new users. Yes, the influx is a challenge, but some people really love engaging new people. I'm not one of those. I'm one of those to stand in the shadows and bitch about it...but I'm also not going to hide them all. I'd rather see everything so that I can bitch than hide it. Eventually one day my patience may run out and I may echo kleinbl00's approach. But - on the other hand - kb follows global. I don't follow global. So in that my whole experience of this new surge of users is already way, way different from him. If I did follow global maybe I would use this feature. I think that the benefits Hubski offers of personalization mean that the people who feel they need to use this feature will. My feed is virtually unchanged right now. I'm actually scoping out global and #askhubski so I can see what the fuss is about. As a result, I'd never need this feature, but I'd probably see new users in things like comment threads. Just because something is good, does not mean it is good or useful to everyone, I guess. Well if it's really a good feature, then people will use it
And again here I do disagree. Hush, mute, and ignore are great features. I love that I have them. I have ignored one user, muted two users, and hushed three of them. Just because they are great features do not mean that I am using them all the time
Great point. It could be Hubski gets mentioned in buzzfeed (god forbid) and I turn it on for a day or two and then back off again for normal newbie traffic. It could be used as a tool and not a defaulted to "on" type thing.
Or, you have exactly one day to research torque wrenches, toddler beds and high chairs while also attempting to procure valve shims from a factory in Italy that's about to close for the summer so that your $16k superbike doesn't fry a cylinder head and the one break you took from doing this and balancing your Quickbooks erupts into two hours of infighting over the evilness of ignoring people and rather than saying "fuck this site I'm done with it" you'd like a simple function that restores its functionality to "un-fucked" for just a day or so. Please. Thanks.