Ontario Shore Fishing Forum

Hey,

I have for some time been pondering the worth of the “16” posts thing regarding reports.

My thoughts: - no upside so far, and is really depressing and a pain in the butt to police/enforce. I know – I was one of the watchdogs.
Plus it would require way less “lightning” from our resident Zeus.

This 16 system (as I and others had hoped) might be a way of promoting participation from quality members. For a very few it did – but more than likely it may have pi$$ed off many prospective good and worthy members.

When all is considered, and a review is done of the most recent reports – there was little that exposed “secrets”. (One shouldn’t share such here anyway.)

My bottom line is – and not just MB’s quite recent proposal of a reduced “5” post restriction – lets make it wide open with restrictive conditions on the posts that are “too specific and revealing” - not on the readers. Plus, simply ban/delete all REPORTS (not articles or advice) on “in land” shore line tributary fishing for salmon and rainbow from mid-August to early June of the following year.

Instead there may be value in restricting the viewing of pictures and attachments until a certain low level number of “valuable” posts, and/or a VERY mandatory introduction, have been made as judged by the administrator or moderators. This I believe would suit the 16 zoomers - as they could quickly read any and all, and then go silently on their lurking way without any useless crap being posted. While at the same time for other new members – their curiosity and the desire to see the photos and often valuable attachments might initiate some contribution, or discussions/comments - and be of value for all.

(Just imagine how many posts might happen after close to 2000 cant see the pics and attachments no more.)

Comments, written abuse or alternate thoughts?............................

Cheers,

OldTimer

If we make it 5 minimum, then that's all. I don't know how difficult it is to program in photo viewing based on the number of posts. MA can enlighten us.

But zoomer will be zoomers...regardless if they want to see pics or not. If they really do want to see the pics, they will stick around and contribute a worthy number of minimum posts.

I don't see the need to ban or delete reports. People can find out about hot action. That's fine. It's pretty public knowledge. But it is up to members to regulate their own posts regarding locations and photo background.

My local Ottawa board has no restrictions and that seems to work; I have met people who have trolled for years before the signed up.

I would hate to censor things or have blackout periods; for example as someone who has yet had the oportunity to high up salmon/rainbows I eagerly anticipate those reports. I don't think I qualify as a Zommer any more