While I think most members are genuine, this smells like something that could turn into a clique. Any criteria for access should be clearly stated and apply to everyone equally so people understand what’s required of them, and should preferably lean toward inclusion rather than exclusion.
While some criteria like post count can be gotten around, the fact is we all know who they are, they’re pretty obvious. Same with the bad actors and those who regularly court controversy.
Some example criteria to consider:
- Should have no official warnings or controversy or frequent flagging of posts.
- Minimum time on forum, e.g. 1 year, but should be long enough to show significant exposure to SC subs
- Minimum posts, e.g. 250 - not everyone posts a lot but some minimum level is probably needed otherwise there’s no way to judge their maturity, and if someone spams the forum it’s pretty obvious.
- At least one journal of significant length
- etc
These are just some examples.
Once the criteria are met the member should be able to request access through some official channel (e.g. support ticket), and not have to go requesting a referral from some select group of people. At that point if Fire/Saint, the mods or forum ambassadors have a reasonable objection to that user then the request can be denied otherwise I think it should be granted.
No system is foolproof, but I hope anything implemented is primarily inclusive, and that we avoid any system where popularity or connections on the forum are the basis for selection.
