Do controversial posters generate more members?

[Ese_Guy]

This is not scientific or factual, only a mere observation.

I have noticed that when we have members posting offensive remarks, some people sign up in order to get their two cents in.

Do you all see this? Do we need more controversy to increase membership?

[Leon of Silvren]

It depends on what kind of controversy are you talking about, because offensive remarks are not controversy......but yes, controversy is good, as long as it doesn't get offensive, you have to know with who you can discuss a controversial topic.

[GiorgioII]

Although that is true Ese_Guy and we do get members signing up to have a good old slanging contest I am sure we would generate even more members if they saw that there was actually a lot of good conversation going on....

[Ese_Guy]

Well that's what we want . . . interesting posts and discussions. :)

When we have a poster making derrogatory remarks, people want to respond. Some sign up just for that reason.

[Leon of Silvren]

If someone just signs up in order to respond an offense with another offense is he worth in the board??

[Ese_Guy]

Is that a philosophical question?
It doesn't really matter who responds and whether they continue to participate or not. The fact is that not many people make it a habit of posting here more than once. Many are only enticed because they come across a post that "moved" then to respond - whatever the response is, positive or negative. Luckily though, many have stayed on and continued to post.

The great majority of SFN "members" have only posted once or less. I still think the member list should be cleared out for any member that has posted once or non at all before a year is up.
So for example, on January 1st, 2005, any member with <= 1 post that has not posted between 12/31/2004 and 12/31/2005 should be deleted.

[ItalianBoy]

For experience. You got to know who you can banter with no cussing with, and who cant take it. Some people will do anything to ban you just because you are screwing around. That is why I kinda stopped. So many people take things too seriously.

[Leon of Silvren]

That's true DABIZ.....and you certainly know that from experience! :silly:

[Leon of Silvren]

Is that a philosophical question?
It doesn't really matter who responds and whether they continue to participate or not. The fact is that not many people make it a habit of posting here more than once. Many are only enticed because they come across a post that "moved" then to respond - whatever the response is, positive or negative. Luckily though, many have stayed on and continued to post.

The great majority of SFN "members" have only posted once or less. I still think the member list should be cleared out for any member that has posted once or non at all before a year is up.
So for example, on January 1st, 2005, any member with <= 1 post that has not posted between 12/31/2004 and 12/31/2005 should be deleted.
I don't think that's a good idea, if someone is registered, it'll be more likely for him to post again than if he wasn't registered. We've talked about this several times....

[ItalianBoy]

I am not DABIZ, I am The Legend!

Yes I know from experience big time. And that is why I stopped. I just noticed how some people could not take it and made forums something way more important then they are. I shall have a new sig. coming up.

[Leon of Silvren]

I'm seeing it right now, if you think you're gonna avoid conflicts with that, think twice mate.

[ItalianBoy]

Well I state it clearly man. I am not trying to avoid anything. Try to see what I really mean! :rolling:

[Leon of Silvren]

To avoid a ban??

[Ese_Guy]

I don't think that's a good idea, if someone is registered, it'll be more likely for him to post again than if he wasn't registered. We've talked about this several times....
Not really.
Other members have admitted that they posted once a long time ago and when they wanted to post again, they forgot their user ID and password so they re-registered.
It is merely a theory that members who are registered and have only posted once - over the years - will post again. In practice it is extremely rare that it happens.

[ItalianBoy]

To avoid a ban??

Of course not. To avoid the person I am replying to to get it the wrong way. Dont see why you are so fussed about it man.

[Leon of Silvren]

Then I was right, to avoid conflicts with other people.....

[aguilas]

I can see where Ese Guy is coming from. I signed up becuase people were talking shit about Mexico and Cuauhtemoc and i decieded to sign up to defend them, and i ended up staying.