New (Feb 11) R/T Board Posting Reqs

[360Joules]

I just quoted your post because I think that many DIS posters/lurkers feel the same way - they think they don't know enough to post and besides that, usually others have already provided the answer. I understand.

But there are many threads that call for an opinion or for sharing an experience. No right or wrong answers there. For example, why not share your experience at one of the Disney Restaurants?

So lurkers - we invite you to just jump in and state your opinion once or twice a week There are many opportunities on the Theme Parks Board, the Resorts Board, the Transportation Board, and the Restaurants Board to name just a few. Your posts do not have to be on one of the DVC Boards.

Please remember that the 50 post requirement only applies to those of you who want to use the DIS Rent/Trade Board to transfer or rent your points.

Anyone can reply to a thread posted on the R/T Board - no 50 post requirement to do that.

Thank You Carol...well said

 

[Chuck S]

Chuck S, there has been some debate above as to the value of the members who prefer not to actively post but do enjoy reading what others have to say. It could be interpreted that the rule on posting to the rent board takes a similar point of view.

My point on ad revenue is that members who choose not to post still support this site in ways that are not as obvious as someone with thousands of visible contributions. It would be interesting to see how many members there are in comparison to members who contribute on a regular basis.

I think that these posts are addressing the new posting rules and offering opinion and commentary that all DISBoard members should be considered valuble even if the do not meet a required level submissions.

Some of the comments in this thread offer a different opinion so I thought I would chime in.

Surely, you would agree that there needs to be criteria that is reviewable and verifiable for an individual poster upon which to base the posting rules. From that standpoint, there is no way to verify how often a person lurks, reads or visits the DIS. Advertising revenue, board user counts, etc. are also not verifiable or linkable to a single, specific individual. Thus, for the sole purposes of setting an individual's posting criteria, lurking status can not be a plausible consideration.

 

[kmsimone]

Surely, you would agree that there needs to be criteria that is reviewable and verifiable for an individual poster upon which to base the posting rules. From that standpoint, there is no way to verify how often a person lurks, reads or visits the DIS. Advertising revenue, board user counts, etc. are also not verifiable or linkable to a single, specific individual. Thus, for the sole purposes of setting an individual's posting criteria, lurking status can not be a plausible consideration.

Not sure I would have that rule in place. But as others have said in other posts, "your site your rules" I am not disputing your right to have the rule.

I think though that in defending the rule there has been some poor choices of words is describing the value of lurkers, or a lack of understanding of the value they provide in supporting this sites financial obligations.

I have posted before that I have been a visitor to this site for a long tlme with 0 posts. It is an invaluable source of information as I have planned WDW trips.

Did not know until recently that in order to enjoy the all free benefits of the free membership that I would need to offer thoughts and opinions even if I preferred not to.

 

[Chuck S]

Not sure I would have that rule in place. But as others have said in other posts, "your site your rules" I am not disputing your right to have the rule.

I think though that in defending the rule there has been some poor choices of words is describing the value of lurkers, or a lack of understanding of the value they provide in supporting this sites financial obligations.

I have posted before that I have been a visitor to this site for a long tlme with 0 posts. It is an invaluable source of information as I have planned WDW trips.

Did not know until recently that in order to enjoy the all free benefits of the free membership that I would need to offer thoughts and opinions even if I preferred not to.

Well, technically, you've always been required to have a minimum number of posts to use all the free benefits, like having the ability to send PMs and DIS system emails. This is simply another requirement, an ongoing minimum number of posts to be able to offer your points for rental or transfer. And there are plenty of other venues for rental if you choose not to meet that criteria here. No one is forced to use our Rent/Trade board.

 

[360Joules]

Not sure I would have that rule in place. But as others have said in other posts, "your site your rules" I am not disputing your right to have the rule.

I think though that in defending the rule there has been some poor choices of words is describing the value of lurkers, or a lack of understanding of the value they provide in supporting this sites financial obligations.

I have posted before that I have been a visitor to this site for a long tlme with 0 posts. It is an invaluable source of information as I have planned WDW trips.

Did not know until recently that in order to enjoy the all free benefits of the free membership that I would need to offer thoughts and opinions even if I preferred not to.

Thank you for saying what ive been trying to say all along

 

[kmsimone]

Well, technically, you've always been required to have a minimum number of posts to use all the free benefits, like having the ability to send PMs and DIS system emails. This is simply another requirement, an ongoing minimum number of posts to be able to offer your points for rental or transfer. And there are plenty of other venues for rental if you choose not to meet that criteria here. No one is forced to use our Rent/Trade board.

Less about the rule than comments about lurkers providing vale to this site.

 

[Chuck S]

Less about the rule than comments about lurkers providing vale to this site.

Once again, that is not the topic of this thread, the topic IS the posting rules.

 

[kmsimone]

Once again, that is not the topic of this thread, the topic IS the posting rules.

Subjective,
But in the end that's your roll.

 

[360Joules]

Giddy up...Start a Lurkers thread..lol

Dont count this one..too short and meaningless

 

[kmsimone]

Giddy up...Start a Lurkers thread..lol

Dont count this one..too short and meaningless

I would start a lurkers thread, but I am afraid no one would post to it.

And I would count your post above

 

[LisaS]

Did not know until recently that in order to enjoy the all free benefits of the free membership that I would need to offer thoughts and opinions even if I preferred not to.

The Rent/Trade board is a special case because money is involved. We encourage those considering renting points from a DVC owner to check out the owner's past posts. That requires that there are some past posts to review, preferably recent ones as well to show that the owner is actively engaged here.

In the 3 years I have been a moderator on the R/T board we have had very few problems but most (maybe all?) of the issues that did come up involved a DVC owner who rarely posted anywhere other than the Rent/Trade board. They came to the R/T board, posted their points for rent, made the reservations and then stopped communicating with their renters. In most cases the renter did have a reservation when they got to WDW but there was a lot of anxiety along the way because the owner stopped responding after receiving the money from the renter. We don't see those sorts of problems with our active members who rent their points. I hope that the new posting requirement will make our R/T board less attractive to those owners looking to do the minimum.

As with any rule change it will also affect those who are trustworthy and responsive DVC owners who would simply prefer not to post very often for whatever reason. The new rules will force them to either become more actively engaged in the community here or find other means to rent their points. I hope they opt for the former rather than the latter but I believe the posting requirement is not that hard to meet and that the rule change is the right thing for us to do.

 

[kmsimone]

Thank you for saying what ive been trying to say all along

Happy to help!

 

[Fatalbie]

I understand the rule is not up for change at this time. I also appreciate the thread not being locked and the opportunity to read and comment on others thoughts and opinions on the subject. Similar to issues that pop up with DVC, even though they are not up for change at the time, some good discussion has the potential to provide insight for all.

I was trying to figure out how lurkers contribute and had a difficult time quantifying it. Some prior input regarding the advertising rates and membership are insightful for someone like me who does not live or operate in that world.

Post count basically has to remain part of the criteria, or else someone with a single, quality post (or 5 or 6 posts) in 10 years would qualify, wouldn't they?

I see your point but do not think it does have to remain. I am saying that even with their post count at, above, or below 50 they may qualify; Mod decision and you wouldn't have to review 50 posts to make the determination. It would also not summarily dismiss those members who provide the value of their membership in ways other than high post count.

My comments are based on the assumption that the new system will result in Mods actually reviewing post history to determine quality, quantity and pattern. Under that assumption I think count may play a role, but a hard count number is a significantly less valuable tool in making the determination. I am not insinuating Mods will not do this, I am stating a condition for my comments to make sense.

Sticky
Your active participation as a member of the Disboards Community is essential in order to post Points for Rent threads in the Rent/Trade Forum. All requests to create Points for Rent threads will result in a Moderator review of member posting contribution history. In order to be considered active, a member’s contribution history should reflect a meaningful, continued, and consistent level of participation in areas of the Disboards other than the R/T Forum. If the Moderators of this board feel your post history is not satisfactory, your thread will not be allowed.
You loose nothing and gain flexibility, in my opinion. Arguably easier for the Mods. You make it clear that there are standards and that Mods have discretion related to enforcing those standards. Back to quality over quantity.

My first R/T transaction led to purchasing DVC. I think it is a great service. My postings will increase because I like to have that resource available to me on this site.

Thanks for the impetus to get my post count up. I felt like this was a discussion interesting enough to read and weigh in on.
Jim

 

[dvcbrad]

In most cases the renter did have a reservation when they got to WDW but there was a lot of anxiety along the way because the owner stopped responding after receiving the money from the renter. We don't see those sorts of problems with our active members who rent their points. I hope that the new posting requirement will make our R/T board less attractive to those owners looking to do the minimum.

Jim, thanks for weighing-in. You had some good thoughts and I, like you, agree that to continue to utilize the r/t boards, and after starting and then reading various comments and better understanding the issue, have decided I'll make an effort to step-up posts. As I said, I have had great expereinces renting to other disboard folks, which then brings me to why I quoted Lisa above.

Up until now, I've been a non-volume poster who has only replied when I felt I could make a meaningful contribution to a thread. Of my 100 and some posts, I had only posted about 10 - max - on the r/t boards. My communication with my renters, though, was always timely, responsive, and proactive .. right up until when they were going to the DVC that they chose. I always provided numerous phone numbers and told them to not hesitate to contact me if they had any difficulty whatsoever. We've used contracts, I scan and send them copies of reservations, we exchange confirmations of payment and receipt, make sure they receive their DME info, yadda, yadda. In essence, I feel that they are my 'customers', and that I should treat them as such. They were handing over money to me, and my feeling is that they should feel comfortable doing so.

My point is that that's all behind the scenes and that just because I was not a high volume poster, I was highly responsive for my renters. One doesn't imply the other, yet, as I and others have said, I understand too that there has to be some sort of measurement criteria. I'll just have to become a little more visible to the disboards to utilize the service. It's just a little more difficult to take the time to do that in a non-transaction based environment than it is to do for your 'customer'. (Maybe I'll have to think of posting as a method of reaching out to potential customers!)

Brad

 

[Fatalbie]

Thanks Brad.
Working on the post count, sorry.

Jim