Guests, A Deathlist Enhancement, Or Detriment?

[Tempus Fugit 214]

So do you think that guests contributions were on the whole a good or bad thing?

 

Want to see the return of the drive by ranter?

 

Or glad to see the back of them?

 

Have your say.

[Phantom 2,535]

I voted for "No" as it doesn't take much to register on the site. Although I have to admit in an attempt to be the first to post information on the site, I've forgotten to log in and been able to do so under a guest login

Although those that rant about the goings on are more reluctant to register and thus depriving us of a bit of entertainment

[Handrejka 1,904]

I voted no too. It is afterall very easy and free to register

[M Busby Airlines 7]

Voted No.

 

It is TOO easy to register.

 

How about DNA samples ?

 

That would put the bas****s off.

 

Or a cash donation to Brinsworth House - if you havent got recognisable DNA.

[Harvester Of Souls 40]

Is it only me that misses the guest rants?

[The Pooka 26]

I do miss them and the occasional kranks and there's no good reason not to register before posting. However I suppose that the nature of ranting is that if one takes time to register the rage of the moment is lost. Besides I rather enjoy reading them.

 

So, on the whole, open it up say I.

[Windsor 2,233]

I voted yes - but only because I can't be bothered finding other idiotic things to do.....

[Grim Reaper 186]

Perhaps we'll introduce a series of "drive-by specials" where ranters are free to post for a certain time until it gets out of control again

[BrunoBrimley 86]

I vorted yes and thernb decioseded to read the post is thaty okay? I personly loke the guests and will misst the lADY bird wathcer since now we won;t know how shes doing.

[Deadornot 12]

I didnt vote as the only topic that they should be able to post in is

IRATE VISITORS RAGE HERE IF YOU MUST!

[Canadian Paul 97]

I didnt vote as the only topic that they should be able to post in is

IRATE VISITORS RAGE HERE IF YOU MUST!

 

I voted No, but I sort of agree with you Deadornot.

 

Perhaps we should have IRATE NEWLY REGISTERED MEMBERS RAGE HERE IF YOU MUST!

 

At the very least, it'll cut down on the pure crap and hopefully only leave us with those ranters entertaining enough to register...

[Deadornot 12]

I didnt vote as the only topic that they should be able to post in is

IRATE VISITORS RAGE HERE IF YOU MUST!

 

I voted No, but I sort of agree with you Deadornot.

 

Perhaps we should have IRATE NEWLY REGISTERED MEMBERS RAGE HERE IF YOU MUST!

 

At the very least, it'll cut down on the pure crap and hopefully only leave us with those ranters entertaining enough to register...

 

my only problem with that is that then they would be ranting and swearing at us all the time and we would end up with a very high banned list.

 

But yeah, it would be more entertaining.

[Tempus Fugit 214]

Well I voted yes, I like the idea that guests can post,

 

some of their contributions have been both enlightening and entertaining.

 

Of course you're going to get the occasional troublemaker, who spams the board.

 

Swift and decisive deletion of that kind of nonsense is needed.

 

But mostly I'd say that guest posts add a certain piquancy to the forum.

[football_fan 42]

I voted no. If someone wants to post to the forum, it does not take that much energy to register.

[Star Crossed 33]

I voted to allow guests to post. They are an enhancement to and part of the spirit of DL, as I see it.

 

It's not like the forum gets clogged up by guests anyway, is it? Most of the inane/annoying drivel seems to come from members; at least some of the guests who can be bothered seem to add some interest, like David J Cook (FRAS) in the Patrick Moore thread, or the Anti-Lula/Castro nutter in the Niemeyer thread. I even quite like the ones who chip in with a death-threat one-liner now and then. I can't remember ever being really offended by a guest; it's usually other members to whom I take offence.

 

The only time it really gets to be a problem is when a member takes the ranter's bait and rants back, thus starting a slanging match with said drive-by ranter. That doesn't happen too often, does it?

Let's not prevent guests from posting on the basis of some knee-jerk reaction or just "because we can".

 

Isn't "moderation" of the threads one of the reasons we have Moderators? If and when things get out of hand, we can make changes, but I don't think we should make a pre-emptive strike on guests. That would lower us to the level of, say, Dubya, for instance. Nobody wants that.

 

Perhaps we'll introduce a series of "drive-by specials" where ranters are free to post for a certain time until it gets out of control again

I half-heartedly concur with GR on this point. It's not a bad compromise, IF one must be made. Perhaps a period of one or two days after the death of someone on the list, as there are bound to be (potentially irate and, therefore, funny) people googling them shortly after their demise. Popular favourites not on the DL too, e.g. Dickie O' or, dare I say it, Jane Tomlinson.

 

But, to reiterate, I vote we allow guests to post whenever they like, so long as it doesn't get out of hand. If a guest-related situation gets out of hand, let the Mods do their thing.

 

Yours,

Star Crossed

[in eternum+ 22]

After giving it oodles of thought, I have voted yes.

 

I pretty much hate the guests, and most of what they post. Generally, I am an exclusionist at heart, and most emphatically don't think that guests should be allowed in Dead Chat (God forbid!!).

 

However, I am quite fond of the drive-by, and actually (sometimes) quite enjoy the ensuing repartee. I'm also a HUGE fan of that nutter who posts in the Niemeyer thread. I'd also hate to see MH's DLRI go to waste, especially as I was just beginning to get the hang of it. Furthermore, I remember having quite a thought-provoking debate with a guest about the source of social deviance. (Well, it certainly provoked my thoughts.)

 

I agree with Star Crossed's point above; qualifying the following by first stating that I think our Moderators do a wonderful job of keeping us all in line and keeping everything running shipshape, surely with the host of Mods that we have, the guests can be managed? Admittedly, it got a bit hectic over the weekend, but maybe that was an anomaly? I take Rude Kid's point about how the mods sometimes have to trudge through multiplicitous rubbish in the mornings; as I am not a Mod, and am rarely up in the mornings, I don't know just how bad this is.

 

And, I am still a bit lightheaded from the incident over the weekend involving my computer, a naughty link posted by a guest, and NASTY photos.

 

Finally, I worry that w*nker guests who would normally simply drive by, post something sh*t, and then forget about us, will register, post the sh*t, and then continue to return, the act of registering causing them to pay more attention to the site than they would otherwise. I concede that it is easier to "deal" with members than with guests, but do we really want to become one of "those" sites (the likes of whom shall remain nameless...) that exist in a frenzy of banning?

[Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7]

I voted no because it seems like they dilute teh quality of the thread with inane comments or answers for school assignments. But, I can also see the entertainment value to allowing the masses to post.

[Bald rick 9]

Voted yes as well.

 

I was veering towards no, but the silver-tongued arguments of Star Crossed and in eternum+ persuaded me to see the benefits of guest posts. Guests who post lots of times without registering wind me up, Himler recently being a good example of this. The DLRI is a good reason to allow them, also the sheer lunacy and narrow-mindedness of some of them (especially those in the Pete Twunterty thread) makes me chuckle. Perhaps guest posts could be banned from those threads which have been taken over by these posts.

 

Maybe if those who have registered start ranting, then the mods could have a polite word. or perhaps?

[DevonDeathTrip 2,358]

I voted yes. What harm can a guest do to Death List?

[Lady Die 63]

I voted yes .. the more the merrier

[Cowboy Ronnie 78]

yes from me. Random posts by random people is fun sometimes. How much hassle is it for those mods who ban people to perform the banning? I've called for a few heads but haven't actually pulled the switch on anyone, mostly 'cos I don't know how.

[Slave to the Grave 26]

I voted yes. Some of the most entertaining sequences of posts have arisen as a result of a drive-by rant, it just wouldn't be the same without them.

[Anubis the Jackal 77]

Yes from me too, sponteneity and nonsense...that's what we need. Bring on the freaks!

[Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7]

You know, I voted no, but the more I think about, the more I agree with the people who opted for allowing the Guests to post again. The occassional drive by rant does add some flavor and verity.

[Tuber Mirum 125]

Yes.

There are idiot guests and idiot registered members. It makes no difference really.

 

We should allow guests but forbid idiots.