Limited Access Reports

[FlyingBreadMan]

Has this topic been discussed before?

Limiting the access to reports so that non- posters and non-reviewers cannot lurk and leech.

Good idea or against the spirit of the open forum?

[vw]

Has been covered many times.

All the lurkers and leeches would do is post crap to reach thresholds.

Anyway with out the leech visitors the site would lose its influence, the volume of punters ukp reviews reach is the power of the forum.

[Matrix]

I've noticed that a signing in has been required in the Scots review section recently. Probably in the other sections too.

[FlyingBreadMan]

Has been covered many times.

All the lurkers and leeches would do is post crap to reach thresholds.

Anyway with out the leech visitors the site would lose its influence, the volume of punters ukp reviews reach is the power of the forum.

The reviewer can decide if a report is open or limited. It is up to them if they use it. But perhaps it is against the purpose of the forum.

Still - trolls and lurkers and touts are irritating.

[vw]

The reviewer can decide if a report is open or limited. It is up to them if they use it. But perhaps it is against the purpose of the forum.

Still - trolls and lurkers and touts are irritating.

the reviewer can share when they feel the need or as smiths says when he has had his fill, you already have that power to withhold already.

Everybody is a troll to somebody, an overused word IMO.

Luker is better than someone posting shit to get access to the reviews

Touts will always try to get a free advert on a successful site in any field, joy of being in the internet.

Site is successful why change things?   

[NigelF]

the reviewer can share when they feel the need or as smiths says when he has had his fill, you already have that power to withhold already.

Everybody is a troll to somebody, an overused word IMO.

Luker is better than someone posting shit to get access to the reviews

Touts will always try to get a free advert on a successful site in any field, joy of being in the internet.

Site is successful why change things?   

+1

I think it boils down to whether we (or rather admin) want to help as many people or not. Lurkers are annoying but as you also say:

Anyway with out the leech visitors the site would lose its influence, the volume of punters ukp reviews reach is the power of the forum.

Unfortunately, there's not much more we can do to encourage lurkers to get involved (and no being "friendlier" is not a good idea). There are already incentives though, particularly in regards to having questions answered, being helped or getting recommendations.

[PLeisure]

It's always disappointing to read a thread and some lurker mentions that he's seen a WG, only then offering an opinion. More so if it wasn't positive. Lurker gets asked to submit a review and is suddenly rendered mute again 

There will always be those who are only too happy to take and not give back. They admire UKP for all it gives them, without any thought of reciprocating.
Reminds me of those liggers that show up at high profile parties on someone else's guestlist. Guzzle all the food and drink 'cos it's free 

[shagmore]

Unfortunately thats the way society has gone, a lot of people want everything for free or not having to do anything for it. - Being made worse by Comrade Corbyn and his politics.
 

[Billy no mates]

Being made worse by Comrade Corbyn and his politics.
 

Damn that Corbyn, leeching on our forum