PlanetCricket WIKI

[Jaztheman]

I just leave forums that require membership to read posts and look elsewhere (as normally it is Google that leads me to those sites). I'd hate for PC to go down that route.

I'm with Matt on this one.

 

[Leicester Fox]

I think you should have to have 10 posts to view the downloads, thats what most people join for and it would make for a lot more active members or it could just make for a lot more spam, it worked for me on the rugby forum, I only wanted to get downloads but now I actually like the site and post on it.

 

[Deleted member 9102]

Edit: Chris Gayle

 

[Dan Sturm]

Yeh, we're couch potato's!

The only reason I'd ever go with the idea of a PC wiki is if it gave us extra publicity, whenever I come on, guests outnumber members 5 to 1 at least.

I'd reckon that if you ask the people in charge a high percentage of those guests are actually search engine bots. The actual guest to member ratio is more likely to be in the 2:1 range (if that).

 

[Kev]

Why would you want to restrict people from downloading?

Nothing has been put in the download centre for about 3 months so I seriously doubt that there is a technical reason for doing so (ie bandwidth). If its to make people post, it won't work, if you want people to post start quality threads and don't turn every other thread into a succession of knob gags, or better yet make some downloads for the download centre. If its so you feel like you are in an exclusive little club, then that's very sad.

 

[Leicester Fox]

The reason is so people get to actually feel like part of the site and see some of the other features on it rather than just ignoring it and going sraight to the downloads and I've seen it work on a fair few sites. Then again if this is the stick you get for posting a suggestion I could see maybe its not so good because it doesn't exactly look welcoming does it. Oh and tell me one thread thats been turned into knob gags recently?

 

[Stephen Bailey]

I've often thought that restrictions like that might be a good idea, but now I think completely the opposite. Taking "The Rugby Forum" as a example, it's annoys the hell out of me that I need a certain number of posts just to be able to view the EA Sports Rugby forum. I have no interest in posting in the rest of the forum, all I want to do is view the EA Sports section and if I want to, download things. Completely the wrong way to go in my opinion.

On forums that require you to register to view them, I just don't bother. I want to be able to see if the forum is actually worth joining before doing so.

 

[smssia0112]

I've often thought that restrictions like that might be a good idea, but now I think completely the opposite. Taking "The Rugby Forum" as a example, it's annoys the hell out of me that I need a certain number of posts just to be able to view the EA Sports Rugby forum. I have no interest in posting in the rest of the forum, all I want to do is view the EA Sports section and if I want to, download things. Completely the wrong way to go in my opinion.

On forums that require you to register to view them, I just don't bother. I want to be able to see if the forum is actually worth joining before doing so.

I've got to agree with you on that one, I hate not being able to view things without registering, I don't want to register to something that I know nothing about other than its overview.

 

[Kiko_97]

getting an article up & running again

 

[sd92]

That wouldn't work. It would likely get deleted.

 

[smssia0112]

Meanwhile we've discussed this, if you want to talk about wikipedia you can do so in the forum for the web. Thread closed.

 

[MattW]

Meanwhile we've discussed this, if you want to talk about wikipedia you can do so in the forum for the web. Thread closed.

You didn't actually close the thread

Remember people, Wikipedia is a Wiki, not all Wikis are Wikipedia. But PlanetCricket doesn't meet the notability requirements for Wikipedia, and having our own Wiki proved useless.

Thread Closed.