It came to in a drewam (well not really), but was thinking of a way to draw members to post more is add a a credit bonus based on number of posts. Like we use for 500 posts they get to edit their member titles. However instead of announcing it like with most updates we do, don't mention it and so we don't have to worry about spammers.
I have two ideas on which system I propose
EXAMPLE BREAK DOWN
100-1 credit for each additional post from 100-199
200-2 credits for each additional post from 200-299
300-3 credits for each additional post from 300-399
So on and so forth
Next one would be like so.
100 posts-users get a 5 credit bonus
200 posts-users get a 10 credit bonus
So On and so forth
Now the reason I say we don't mention this, because everyone will start posting on anything they could find including the old stuff from 2004-5. This cuts the spam problem already and any other problems you could think of that people would cheat at.
Now another question would be if this idea were to go into effect do we give those credits to those who already achieve the requirements or no? or to add more to that question what would would be a cut off for the post limit for those who already achieve if this were to go into effect?
What you are proposing is to reward more credits in posting number range? What's the bonus, is that addition to extra credits earned per posting range?The currect credit system works in reverse of your proposal. The higher posts you contributed the lesser you earn from making short posts. This is to encourage longer and quality posts from members who have been with Xisto long periods of time.
The reccomendation will work to promote Spamming. At present, the creidts are awarded for the quality of post, not the Quantity, which is what you are suggesting, so I would not vote for it.
I agree that the post counts should not influence the amount of credits received.Perhaps special *groups* could receive more credits. For example, the group would be given to privileged members manually, for example "Privileged Member", and they would receive like 102% of the credits instead of only 100%. And there would be "Spammer" groups where they receive only 80% of the credits etc. Maybe the warning system could be used, for example, if you have 10%, you would lose 10% of the credits you would normally earn. etc.
I find the current credit system very nice. After x number of posts you get less credits, duh. You should be expected to have higher quality posts. If someone with say 4000 posts, has less quality, more spammy posts then someone with only 20, something might be wrong here...The current system encourages people with more posts, to post more quality posts. More credits, means less quality for most members(those who come only for hosting).