suggestion - reduce number of posts required to access "private" info...

[Vivienne]

I personally think the requirement for gaining access to the Profiles section should be that you have to share a profile. Want to see the music threads? Share some music. But good luck implementing that. :-) ....

BTW, the minimum used to be 10.

Hope you'll stick around. We can be quite fun, especially when the discussions about pedal stroke drills start up.

Well, there you go with requirements.

I do believe that one of my first posts *question-wise* was how to tame my printer so I didn't need to waste/expend/invest in reams of paper when I hit *print* on an AbFab post. Seems I needed to employ the "selections" thingie on the print whatnot.

Then there's the pedal stroke drills....

...and *lactic acid build-up*

Not for nothing (as they say) as much as a hobby that group fitness and IDC might be for some participants ... it actually is a worthwhile endevour that requires something more than enthusiasm and opinion

[InnerDrive]

While a 5 post minimum is a fairly low hurdle to clear, I can kind of see the OP's point...

I have (and still do) participated in a number of online forums. I've been on some forums that limit your ability to start a thread until you've replied to a few posts (cuts down on SPAM), but this is the first and only forum I've ever participated in that limits access to certain parts of the forum (unless there are segments requiring paid access).

Honestly I'm not sure that the 5 post minimum has any real benefit to the Pedal-on community. What it tends to result in is people making "junk" posts to reach the 5-post minimum so they can see the private forums. Then when they get there and see there's not much action (let's face it - there aren't tons of new profiles being posted), they may not stick around... IMO, rather than increasing engagement for new forum members (which I THINK is the reason for the policy) - I believe it turns some people off and may even drive them away. Participation in this forum seems to be dwindling. I don't think throwing up road blocks to forum access helps that...

[Vivienne]

While a 5 post minimum is a fairly low hurdle to clear, I can kind of see the OP's point...

Honestly I'm not sure that the 5 post minimum has any real benefit to the Pedal-on community. What it tends to result in is people making "junk" posts to reach the 5-post minimum so they can see the private forums. Then when they get there and see there's not much action (let's face it - there aren't tons of new profiles being posted), they may not stick around... IMO, rather than increasing engagement for new forum members (which I THINK is the reason for the policy) - I believe it turns some people off and may even drive them away. Participation in this forum seems to be dwindling. I don't think throwing up road blocks to forum access helps that...

For sure, I seriously doubt that the 5 post minimum generates worthwhile input to the P-O community (really ....just check it out) . However, if there's an argument against the requirement and that it might turn otherwise valuable contributors off, just check it out. From my Facebook and off-line crony input, it's actually because of these lame azz questions that appear to be the Debbie Downer that've trned worthwhile contributors away.

[tvano1991]

I think, trekgirl, that you might have operated under the assumption that they had to be 5 "quality" posts. We still let Viv comment here, so obviously that isn't true (love you, mean it, Vivienne. ). Stick around, write whatever crosses your mind. And maybe, just maybe, you can be given the title of Chandelier too. :-)

This made me laugh out loud.

See, there's a post.

[Paul S.]

Just got around to looking at this, and there are good arguments on both sides for whether or not the 5 post minimum leads to more quality posting on the site. I have to think that anyone deterred from joining the site because of the rule (and there's been enough discussion that the rule should be clear to anyone) wouldn't contribute meaningfully anyway.

Is anyone familiar with the StackExchange Q&A sites? I occasionally look at some of them for my full-time engineering job, and there are many on other topics as well, including fitness (http://fitness.stackexchange.com). I haven't joined or contributed to any of them, since they have strict rules about what is allowed to be asked and answered and an elaborate system of reputation points and privileges (http://fitness.stackexchange.com/help/privileges) that seems downright unfriendly to new participants. Yet they have over 6000 registered users.