Participation

I wrote, awhile back, that in general we shouldn’t care about whether random and anonymous strangers on a P4P board respected us.  But it occurs to me that there is a distinct issue — whether the board as a whole, either the majority of the members or ownership as represented by the staff, wants to insist on participation and contribution as a requirement for remaining a member.

That I consider perfectly legitimate.

The “I don’t respect people who don’t review/contribute” threads are annoying only because that particular board (ASPD) has established what it considered the acceptable level of participation.  For general lurking on public parts of the board, no active participation is required at all.  For access to other parts of the board, with (arguably) more valuable information, either contribute reviews or contribute $$$.  That, in their opinion, is what’s best for the board from the owner’s perspective, regardless of whether it irritates some members.

Since I paid for a Lifetime BCD membership of ASPD five or six years ago, I meet the board’s standards for what the owner considers acceptable.  Given that, I don’t care whether introuble, fubar, or TexasDave55 think I’m a leech.  Nothing personal, but I don’t let them or other anonymous strangers define my sense of self-worth.

If ASPD required something more than I was contributing or had contributed, though?  Perfectly legitimate.  I don’t think such standards often accomplish much in the way of changes in people’s behavior or additional valuable participation.  If people aren’t inclined to participate, even the threat of losing access to a site they consider useful, it will at most result in them trying to skate by with the bare minimum.  Arguably, that’s already a problem with reviews on ASPD — people who post reviews to gain BCD access but throw together a review in a few minutes and hope it qualifies.  And complain if it’s rejected for BCD credit.  (Including, while I was on staff, someone who today is one of the biggest complainers about useless reviews . . . but at the time bitched quite a bit after one of his reviews was rejected. )

So imposing minimum participation standards rarely actually increases valuable participation, it probably just adds a bit of fluff posts/comments by people trying to maintain their membership and eliminates some people not interested in even making that much of an effort.  But that’s OK too.  If nothing more, those who remain know that the board is important to all the rest of the members, which can enhance the feeling of community and make everyone more comfortable.  It can be more tight-knit.  That is certainly a legitimate and worthwhile objective.  Not the only way to run a P4P board, but a reasonable choice.

If ASPD changed its standards, I probably wouldn’t start participating and contributing more just to remain a member.  But more power to them if they deleted me from the board as a result.  I’d admire them for having the courage of their convictions and sticking to their guns.

I just won’t conform my behavior to the desires of a vocal minority, if I don’t find their suggestions persuasive.