01-01-2023, 08:13 PM
Maybe I'm the only one on here with this view, and mods are free to delete this, but I'm asking that the recent policy of requiring WSO share forum posts to unlock threads be reviewed again.
I know the reasons why it was introduced:
These are good arguments. But, as with any change, there are consequences, and those consequences, in my opinion, are outweighing the benefits.
What consequences?
- We now have a WSO shares forum dominated by the same large shares with very little change - have you noticed this? This is making the forum static and rather dull IMO.
- The policy means that volume is prioritised over quality. Small shares (which, I know, can also often be poor quality) don't get the visibility that these large shares get. And let's not pretend the large shares automatically have value because of their size. They are often overblown behemoths; videos of people with an abnormal capacity to blather on about nothing. (OK, not all are, but you get my drift.)
- Any reviews of these large shares quickly get buried, and the value of the share diminished.
I don't have a solution - perhaps the post-to-unlock rule automatically could be removed after a certain number of posts? Or after a fixed amount of time?
Others may disagree, which is fine. It's only my opinion.
Thoughts?
______________________________________________
Maybe an alternative is to split the WSO downloads forum into two: one for small and one for large shares. The large shares forum would have post-to-view enabled, while the small share forum would continue as before. Maybe that's too many forums though...
I know the reasons why it was introduced:
Magic Button :
These are good arguments. But, as with any change, there are consequences, and those consequences, in my opinion, are outweighing the benefits.
What consequences?
- We now have a WSO shares forum dominated by the same large shares with very little change - have you noticed this? This is making the forum static and rather dull IMO.
- The policy means that volume is prioritised over quality. Small shares (which, I know, can also often be poor quality) don't get the visibility that these large shares get. And let's not pretend the large shares automatically have value because of their size. They are often overblown behemoths; videos of people with an abnormal capacity to blather on about nothing. (OK, not all are, but you get my drift.)
- Any reviews of these large shares quickly get buried, and the value of the share diminished.
I don't have a solution - perhaps the post-to-unlock rule automatically could be removed after a certain number of posts? Or after a fixed amount of time?
Others may disagree, which is fine. It's only my opinion.
Thoughts?
______________________________________________
Maybe an alternative is to split the WSO downloads forum into two: one for small and one for large shares. The large shares forum would have post-to-view enabled, while the small share forum would continue as before. Maybe that's too many forums though...