minimum requirements for members

[dynatron]

having been on here around 3 years or so now it seems to have changed in that i no longer vmeet the minimum requirements whatever they are to contact members other than those who have already contacted me and im not allowed to see members other reviews only new current ones
as an elderly member who is now suffering from ill health awaiting a groin operation i would be grateful if anyone knows what the minimum requirements are thanks in advance

[timsussex]

Not posting the same question in 2 places might be one of them 

IIRC the criteria are not published as it encourages people to post just to reach these targets

[Liverpool]

Management knows. Not us and no it won't be advertised or told to you if you ask nicely.

The party line is, if you've got something to say, ask, recommend etc, post it on the correct board for full transparency and openness.

Oh, and don't post the same question twice.

[Hobbit]

In the numerous years that I have been a member, I have probably only sent a pm to members 3 or 4 times at the most. Most of the time, you can ask whatever you want openly. I find people that want to pm all the time quite suspicious and I tend to ignore.

[Fuzzyduck]

Since you're not really punting that much (3 reviews in nearly 4 years isn't exactly "active"), it does beg the question "why do you need these extra privileges"?

[Atrueyorkie]

Been a member since 2017 and you have 3 reviews, there’s the clue

[WelshClipper]

I hate to single out an example of how its done, but have a look at any post by ‘Home alone’.

The guy has essentially quit punting for medical reasons, moved into assisted living and selling his flat. Yet he still manages to contribute and I bet he has access to all areas.

So OP, it can be done

[usroads]

I've got the same restrictions.   
I post on topics and do the occasional review so i'm also wondering what the criteria is?
I don't particularly want to PM members but being able to read other reviews would be helpful.

[southcoastpunter]

The very fact that some guys have to ask that question shows that they are not very active as a forum member (let alone posting reviews) as the question was asked not that long ago (3 or 4 months?) and answered. If i remember correctly,  the site owner,  Head1, sets and applies the criteria and he ain't going to tell us what it is.

Fair enough, its his site!

[myothernameis]

i would be grateful if anyone knows what the minimum requirements are thanks in advance

In a nut shell, post, post, post, review, contribute, post, post, review, contribute, and soon, you may find your self........

[limarasa9]

One way is to post “ruus cluut boombacluut maan” on all the posts and your post count will increase dramatically    

[Fuzzyduck]

One way is to post “ruus cluut boombacluut maan” on all the posts and your post count will increase dramatically    

[lillythesavage]

I've got the same restrictions.   
I post on topics and do the occasional review so i'm also wondering what the criteria is?
I don't particularly want to PM members but being able to read other reviews would be helpful.

There is nothing stopping you reading reviews or using the search feature to find them.

I am in the same boat, but not found it a hinderance, except having to delay replies to PM,s as they are limited.

If the management felt things needed changing it would have been with good intent, I doubt moaning is going to change minds 

[usroads]

I'm not moaning Lily - just saying.
I accept rules are rules - I post comments, try to be helpful where I can and review when I can.   

[lillythesavage]

I'm not moaning Lily - just saying.
I accept rules are rules - I post comments, try to be helpful where I can and review when I can.   

Was not specifically aimed at you  , just a general point, we are using a site set up by others, who can only run it as they see fit and change around in an effort to make it work better. 

[Doc Holliday]

In a nut shell, post, post, post, review, contribute, post, post, review, contribute, and soon, you may find your self........

The criteria appear to be based mainly around review, review and continue to review regularly, rather than post. I haven't posted any reviews since 2019 (as I haven't punted) and since late April my account is now restricted also, in terms of the links to other members posts or reviews being blocked.

Separately, I believe PMs should be limited 'number wise' for all members and I understand that is now largely the case? This helps prevent a whole sub culture of punting information exchange between members, contrary to the ethos of the site. Just because someone posts reviews, does not mean they are also not exchanging considerable punting information privately.

Admin will be aware how much you use the PM facility as it is logged, and for the record I have exchanged PMs quite a lot since being active on here, (though much less so recently) but very few have been punting related.

[lamboman]

One way is to post “ruus cluut boombacluut maan” on all the posts and your post count will increase dramatically    

 

[Dave82]

Being restricted doesn't really bother me. I'm new ish in here. It would be nice to read up on certain peoples reviews but I won't lose any sleep over it. I'll keep posting and reviewing when I can. When the restrictions for us newbies are lifted I'll celebrate with a punt and prompt review of it.

[MissWolf]

One way is to post “ruus cluut boombacluut maan” on all the posts and your post count will increase dramatically    

Dear God we don't need any more idiots posting arse cloth, period cloth maan all over the site, one misogynistic fool is enough for any forum surely 

[Lou2019]

Dear God we don't need any more idiots posting arse cloth, period cloth maan all over the site, one misogynistic fool is enough for any forum surely 

 

[belamy85]

I must confess I was initially a bit put out by the minimum requirements, less bcs I couldn't PM other members than I couldn't check out all their reviews.


As the months have gone by, however, I actually appreciate the security element that gives. Imagine you wrote a negative review about an SP. She looks it up and then all the other reviews you've written and she might be able to piece together who you are especially if you leave feedback on AW and she cross references the two. With how it's currently set up, no one would be able to do that without being a regular contributor to the site, which a random SP is highly unlikely to be. I for one am glad the minimum requirements are in place.

[Torqy]

Being able to read other members reviews can be useful, if I see a couple of negative reviews against a SP that I am considering I can check out how ‘tough’ the member is in his general reviewing. I found on two occasions that a member has a very high percentage of negative reviews or is simply punting outside of their normal SP category.

But if you are not punting anymore then this would be of no help to you. To me the restrictions seem reasonable, but I confess to being previously frustrated, particularly so when membership was closed for a considerable period and I could not submit reviews.

I can only imagine the carnage and chaos on the forum if it was unregulated 

[Torqy]

As the months have gone by, however, I actually appreciate the security element that gives. Imagine you wrote a negative review about an SP. She looks it up and then all the other reviews you've written and she might be able to piece together who you are especially if you leave feedback on AW and she cross references the two. With how it's currently set up, no one would be able to do that without being a regular contributor to the site, which a random SP is highly unlikely to be. I for one am glad the minimum requirements are in place.

Excellent point, agreed, where possible I have recently stopped making formal bookings on AW and now limit my AW feedback for that very reason. This may be overkill but cross referencing can still be done by listing SP reviews here. The anonymity and security helps us publish poor reviews with confidence, negatively reviewing a SP on AW has consequences.

[Dave82]

I must confess I was initially a bit put out by the minimum requirements, less bcs I couldn't PM other members than I couldn't check out all their reviews.


As the months have gone by, however, I actually appreciate the security element that gives. Imagine you wrote a negative review about an SP. She looks it up and then all the other reviews you've written and she might be able to piece together who you are especially if you leave feedback on AW and she cross references the two. With how it's currently set up, no one would be able to do that without being a regular contributor to the site, which a random SP is highly unlikely to be. I for one am glad the minimum requirements are in place.

Never really thought of it like that. Good point

[Dweeby]

What with the pandemic giving less opportunity and fewer SP's, and recent price rises, I've virtually stopped. My access has also been curtailed. Whilst the prices are still too high, the other restrictions are reducing, so I'm hoping to regain full access, as I become more involved again.

[belamy85]

Excellent point, agreed, where possible I have recently stopped making formal bookings on AW and now limit my AW feedback for that very reason. This may be overkill but cross referencing can still be done by listing SP reviews here. The anonymity and security helps us publish poor reviews with confidence, negatively reviewing a SP on AW has consequences.

Interesting you say that as I've done exactly the same thing since I've started using this site. I want to be honest in my reviews and given that you never know if an SP will read one about herself or how she'll react the less of a trail you leave the better... Which goes back to my earlier post that it's a good thing that there are minimum requirements for being able to read all of a member's reviews.

[Chazz]

One way is to post “ruus cluut boombacluut maan” on all the posts and your post count will increase dramatically    

Simpletto! 🐅🥊🥊🥊🥊🥊🥊✊✊✊✊✊✊

[limarasa9]

Simpletto! 🐅🥊🥊🥊🥊🥊🥊✊✊✊✊✊✊

 

[seeker]

Was a bit miffed at first ,when a fellow punter sent me a pm
To see a big yellow banner across the top saying " restricted pms."
But thinking back،makes a lot of sense .
I've cut back on my punting dramatically due to financial reasons
and also tend to See the same few sps most of the time ,who are already well reviewed,
I always report a negative or if I feel the service has dramatically changed ,
Suppose Admin has thought this through, and they are the rules ,
Hopefully will encourage more contributions. 

[big-al93]

Was a bit miffed at first ,when a fellow punter sent me a pm
To see a big yellow banner across the top saying " restricted pms."
But thinking back،makes a lot of sense .
I've cut back on my punting dramatically due to financial reasons
and also tend to See the same few sps most of the time ,who are already well reviewed,
I always report a negative or if I feel the service has dramatically changed ,
Suppose Admin has thought this through, and they are the rules ,
Hopefully will encourage more contributions. 

Did that mean that you couldn't read the PM or just not reply?

[seeker]

I could read and replied.
But only allowed to members i have messaged before
Or a member who first messages me .

[big-al93]

That's good then. I have only once initiated a PM, but it would be frustrating if I couldn't reply it someone else if they messaged me.

[Head1]

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=351038.0