Has the min 200 posts in GD helped?

[perna]

Respect the opinions of every member here, regardless of post count, but if we return to the opening question, "has it helped ...?", I've got to concede that it has. So much so, in fact, that I have actually enjoyed several of the GD threads in play recently, despite being a very non-GD kind of guy by nature. The topics which have come up have been more relevant, and the discussion more focused than was the case just a few months ago.

To those who are already on board with the culture of the site, and feel unncessesarily constrained by the post-count limitation, it may be worth reiterating that site sponsorship eliminates this restriction -- not because of an exchange of treasure for freedom, but rather because of what it signals about the member's level of commitment to the site and it's larger objectives.

AC

I might have agreed with you if the only thing that was changed at the time was the post count requirement. That is far from the only thing that happened at the time. A bunch of the people that were constantly derailing threads were banned, or left the forum. The thread that was made at the time that prompted the post count requirement probably changed thing more than anything, there were plenty of people that changed what and how they post because of it.

For the most part I do not think the topics have changed much at all, same basic stuff from the news regarding gun rights, personal freedoms, self defense stuff. I do agree they seem to stay on topic longer, but I think that if more from people being banned and others checking themselves.

[joffe]

I think it has. In the beginning I got a few annoyed surprises when I clicked reply out of habit, but it faded after a while. Reading it is really more pleasant now.

[dew4au]

Wow, you guys just got punked. Bulbvivid just drew you guys into the argument so he could get his post count up to 200!

In all seriousness; I like the 200 limit and I think it's improved GD.

[Army Chief]

I might have agreed with you if the only thing that was changed at the time was the post count requirement. That is far from the only thing that happened at the time..

Absolutely on-point. I would not submit that the post-count requirement was "the" fix, but rather, that it was an integral part of a larger effort. By erecting a barrier for those members who were pulling a seat up to the table, but contributing nothing of substance elsewhere on the boards, the incentive to continue that kind of involvement was removed.

Many, many of these guys were sub-200 post members; some were not. The latter had to be reined in by other means, of course, but the GD changes definitely reduced the white noise level, which in turn, seemed to make the other efforts more effective.

AC

[SHIVAN]

Wow, you guys just got punked.

We can edit a user's post count back to zero if we feel posts are without merit. Should I demonstrate?

[ROGOPGEAR]

there have been a few GD threads that I was reading and went to reply, and had the annoying notification that I couldn't. but it's fine, I enjoy the other threads, so I'll just wait.

[FireandFlames]

In my opinion yes, and it sets this site apart.
I have been on many other forums where the general discussion sections are over run and full of crap. The post limit weeds the snot nosed kids out.

Now on the other hand it has bugged the crap out of me because I have had the answers to some of the questions raised there, but I'm just a reckless 18yo what can I contribute .
I'd rather have a quality forum where I can actually learn something and be among guys that know their stuff, than have something that is the opposite. The post limit also makes me look at the technical aspect of the AR and tactics and training involved in shooting, which is only beneficial to me.

[Dot.Com]

I can't really comment about if it has helped per se, because I actually didn't even realize there was a general discussion forum until reading this thread, but after scanning the topics there and the subtext under the heading (current events, politics, news, etc.) I believe that such a limit is appropriate and quite helpful in the sense that 200 posts is a good number for people to work themselves into and get acquainted with the system.

My own post count is quite low, I don't know exactly but I would venture around 10, mainly because I joined m4carbine.net to read and ask questions regarding technical matters when I feel the need to. The point though, is that I joined so that when I do ask a question, it can be answered by 1) several sources so I can get an indication of a baseline of which to work off of, and 2) by industry professionals, the latter being the crux of the matter. I believe that in the same way I seek the knowledge of industry professionals, that general discussion topics should be discussed by those who have a somewhat established reputation and aren't, to reiterate what others have said, jackasses - is an important feature in maintaining the integrity and usefulness of threads.

Just my own take for whatever its worth (I only have about 10 posts)

-Dot.Com