Move to Subscription or NOT?

[svero]

We're seriously considering moving the bulk of the forum over to a paid subscription model.

Why? It's been seen that the quality of posts are steadily declining as the forum grows and we're losing quality posters who don't want to bother reading through many uninteresting or repeated posts. It's felt that moving to a subscription model will help weed out people who are not terribly serious about creating games. The goal here is not to make money.

How? Most of the forums will be open to anyone to read, but in order to post to them you'll have to subscribe first. There may be a few exceptions like news & announcements which would likely remain open to everyone.

We'll set the cost at the minimum possible amount. The money that is collected will be used in some way to either further the forum, or benefit the developer community in one way or another. A number of ideas have been discussed like setting up a download site on the indiegamer home page, or holding a game contest, or providing a prize to the highest rated poster etc... So the assumption is it will be 1$ or whatever minimum we can charge. (probably in practice it would be 3-5$)

So please vote in the poll and let us know how you feel about this idea.

[ggambett]

I think it's a good idea in general. However, how do you plan to deal with the "Snood Guy" kind of case? It was great to have the Snood Guy come and post a little, too bad some people made him run away. Would he had posted if in addition to registering he had to pay? What about Paul from Big Fish, who came to clarify a couple of issues? I think these admittedly few contributions are still valuable but are kind of "impulse post" - how do you plan to keep them?

[Mark Currie]

However, how do you plan to deal with the "Snood Guy" kind of case?....

One idea is to require payment for people who create new posts--but let anyone post responses.

[dima]

I voted againts. Not because I'm cheap, but because I think it's the wrong way to go, and that in the long run the forums will suffer worse. If you think that the quality of posts isn't high enough, wait until there are no posts, and same people are arguing about the same issue over and over. As I've mentioned before, if you want quality info, then summarise it, publish articles, some game reviews, put some content on the site. Or just moderate the place slightly better.

Either way this goes, I wish best for the forums, it's a good place to share pasion and ask questions. I'll stick around either way, but the poll is sneaky, so I had to get the 1 negative vote in there.

[puggy]

i think a pay for posting system would drive away the irrelevant poster's, but you also risk driving away the decent posters as well.

One solution would be to have some categories which only trusted user's can post, this may cause some admin headaches but would mean that those sections of the forum should have relevant posts.

[James C. Smith]

I don’t like the options available in the poll. They don't seem to match the question. My answer to the question “Should the Indiegamer forums move to a subscription model?� is very different than the answer I would give to the question “Would you be willing to pay a fee to be a member of this forum?�

I wouldn’t think twice about paying $20 for membership and posting privileges. I would pay in a heartbeat. But I do not think Indiegamer forums should move to a subscription model because I am afraid it would drive away many potential members who would be valuable to have here. I am also afraid it would create other problems with managing accounts and refunds and angry customers.

[Black Hydra]

I'd be happy to pay.

However, I have to agree with James. I don't think that this is the proper direction.

Alot of talk has been spewed about how 'post quality is declining' and we only should be hearing from experts.

If I wanted to hear from experts I would read ARTICLES. I wouldn't visit a forum. Articles and books are sources where I can look at expert testimony.

I came here knowing nothing about shareware and was excited about the prospect of it. I made a post asking for advice on how to start.

This is the same opportunity WE should provide to everyone. So that beginners can ask questions and the experts here, like you svero, James (both of you ), Retro64, Itsme, and the rest.

I don't think the answer is subscription.

I think it is moderation. I think its time to start cracking down on people who aren't either asking legitimate questions or providing some help. If that means that some of my posts will get deleted, then maybe I need to SHUT UP!

If you don't like the state of the forums, just police it a bit better. Soon, those who aren't serious will leave when they see that this isn't a place to chit-chat but to talk seriously.

If you get people to subscribe, you will still have posts that many feel are not worthwhile.

For example, I'm sure both myself and princec would subscribe (sorry Cas, I hate to pick on you but I'm going to pick on myself aswell).

I made a thread going over negativity, probably regretting it now as I can see it only caused a heated arguement, not really providing much value (as I initially thought). If you had simply deleted the thread, those kind of opinionated threads wouldn't exist.

Same goes for some of Cas's threads. He said himself he intended to tell a 'cautionary' tale to beginners. However the thread (no thanks to myself) turned into a war between the optimists and pessimests. Clearly moderation here would have stopped this from getting out of hand.

I think that you and the other moderators should just not worry about offending anyone. If a thread seems inappropriate or irrelevant, just delete it.

But PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, don't start forcing people who were once like myself to push them away for what could be an opportunity that will change their lives. Because I can tell you, had I not found this forum and Steve's articles at dexterity, I wouldn't be doing this right now. Isn't that what these forums were about?

Hopefully you won't deny those who truly want to ask questions and learn because some people have been abusing the forums as a place for chit-chat or irrelevant posts (which much to my despair, can sometimes include myself)

C'mon you know which posts are crap. Just lock and censor, and those who simply want to treat these forums as a place to either bitch or shout irrelevant opinions will leave.

[Rainer Deyke]

At this point, there is almost no useful new information for me on this message board. If I post at all, it is usually to be helpful to other people. I don't think I should have to pay for the privilege of helping people.

[ggambett]

I second what Black Hydra says. He said it much more clearly than myself. Maybe it's not 4:15 am in his time zone

[Savant]

I'm against the idea simply from the point of view of stagnation. I don't see new people paying to subscribe simply for the honor of posting. A subscription model will lead to the place becoming a boys club, with the same set of posters talking to each other over and over.

I also think that you're not going to cut down on noise that way. If a guy wanted to troll the forums, how would paying a dollar stop him? In fact, it might even drive him on harder since he finds the notion of paying $1 so annoying.

A better idea to cut down on noise would be to move to an invitation model. You can't get onto the board unless a member backs you (I'm part of another board which is all AAA game developers and is invitation only - it works beautifully). Start with the 30 best people that you know are currently on the board and go from there.

[baegsi]

I'd pay, but I think its the wrong way to go. What should I vote in this case?

[svero]

If you'd pay, then vote that you'd pay. If you have some other opinion then just post about it in this thread. I just want to clarify a few things..

More mods/moderation : Already debated at great length. Difficult to keep consistent and we think probably innefective in the long run.

Invites only : Maybe too exclusive and definitely not easily automated. We don't want to put ourselves in a position where we have to do a ton of work to go over new member applications etc...

[Bmc]

More mods/moderation : Already debated at great length. Difficult to keep consistent and we think probably innefective in the long run.

I would disagree.

Have 2 kinds of Mods.

"Power Mods" - They have the power moderate any forum.
"Mini Mods" - Choose 1 or 2 (depending on the the amount of new posts a forum gets) mods (who are not already power mods). Give them limited privileges to moderate their assigned forum.

Finally create a forum that is sort of like limbo. This is where all "Mini Mods" would move threads to if they didn't belong in their respective forums. This would be a place where a "Power Mod" would go and eventually review the threads and make the final decision if they should be deleted or moved to another forum.

This system would work beatifully.

[Savant]

Invites only : Maybe too exclusive and definitely not easily automated. We don't want to put ourselves in a position where we have to do a ton of work to go over new member applications etc...

If implemented properly, it doesn't need to be a lot of work. If you start off with a base of people that you implicitly trust/respect, then anyone who they personally invite to take part should be automatically transferred that same level of trust/respect. So if they have a current members backing, they are basically a shoe in.

If it turns out that someone is a problem, that calls the member who recommended them into question at the same time so people will definitely be careful of who they invite as their own membership is at risk if they bring a troll to the table.

[BantamCityGames]

I think the paid subscription model would work but how about a "try before you buy" subscription... 6 months free or something.

[Daire Quinlan]

If implemented properly, it doesn't need to be a lot of work. If you start off with a base of people that you implicitly trust/respect, then anyone who they personally invite to take part should be automatically transferred that same level of trust/respect. So if they have a current members backing, they are basically a shoe in.

If it turns out that someone is a problem, that calls the member who recommended them into question at the same time so people will definitely be careful of who they invite as their own membership is at risk if they bring a troll to the table.

Something as simple as requiring somebody to put in an existing forum member into some field when they're filling in their registration. Then that forum member gets a PM asking them to confim or deny the registration. I wouldn't go as far as banning people who are responsible for introducing rogue elements to the forum, but have a system whereby you could revoke their recommendation rights. I don't know how easy all this would be to shoehorn into the forum software though. I suspect the changes would be fairly trival though.

D.

[Martoon]

I agree with what James C. Smith and others said. I wouldn't hesitate to pay, but I think charging would be detrimental to the forums.

I also disagree with an invitation model. I think that works great for a AAA developers forum, because AAA developers tend to have a professional work network. By definition, indie developers usually don't have that network.

I think the "problem posts" tend to fall into two broad categories: pissing contests, and naive newbies.

Pissing contests are the threads that often start with an innocent, well meaning post, but then the thread wanders into an emotional debate on some philosophical differences, with no productive end. This includes things like The Great Snood War of 2005 and The Game Developer's Guide to Negativity. These threads will sometimes spawn other threads.

Personally, I haven't yet found the pissing contests to be a problem for me. I might read the first couple posts, then recognize when it's turning into a pissing contest, and I don't read that thread anymore. It's a minor annoyance that the thread keeps showing up in my list of active topics, but it doesn't seem to inhibit my use of the forums. It might be nice if the board had an easy feature for me to ignore a thread so it didn't show up anymore. It might also be nice for a thread to be publicly flagged with a little toilet icon when enough people had it ignored, to warn other people that the thread is potentially a pissing contest.

The naive newbie is the post by the leet-speaking kiddie who's really excited about the awesome 3D MMORPG he's going to make with his friends, because one of his friends has an uncle with a book about Visual Basic. This is not the same as the mature, first-time poster who is considering indie development, has done his research, and has legitimate questions that the board's search feature hasn't answered.

I've found the naive newbie posts to be relatively rare on these forums so far, but I could see how these could get out of hand as the board grows and attracts a wider audience. I'm wondering about the feasibility of implimenting a simple multiple choice quiz. Before a user had posting priveledges, they'd be shown the FAQ, then be given the quiz. Could we come up with a short quiz for which the answers would be obvious to a mature person who'd done a little research and read the FAQ, but might deter the leet-speaking kiddie who's just posting on impulse? I don't know, just a thought.

[baegsi]

If implemented properly, it doesn't need to be a lot of work. If you start off with a base of people that you implicitly trust/respect, then anyone who they personally invite to take part should be automatically transferred that same level of trust/respect. So if they have a current members backing, they are basically a shoe in.

If it turns out that someone is a problem, that calls the member who recommended them into question at the same time so people will definitely be careful of who they invite as their own membership is at risk if they bring a troll to the table.

Ewww... you "break a butterfly on a wheel". If you allow me to be a little sarcastic, but we don't deal here with top-secret, highly personal information. All this just do put down the noise and have people being more on purpose!

Really, don't make it too complex.

What is the real problem? Dexterity times won't come back, regardless what you try. Face it Indie Game Dev is getting more and more popular, resulting in a greater diversity of opinions. Whatever system you implement, it would stay the same.

Just educate the people more. If you want more staying on topic and less chit-chatting or useless fighting, remind the posters of it. As already said, if you want to explore an advanced topic in greater depth, write an article and open a discussion about it. Revitalize the wiki.

[Reactor]

I was going to say something ground breaking and ultra-intelligent, but baegsi beat me to it

[yanuart]

I have an experience of being a mod one of the game development forum in my country, it's kinda hard when you want your forum to be an open house to help ppl but only to find it's turning to a crowded mad house.
It's sorta a dillema, try to put any restriction and ppl will think it's just an elite forum and the forum isn't serving its noble purpose anymore. But then, I don't know what the owner of this forum had in mind so I'll respect any decision made.

Anyway, I think it's inevitable and you can't have it both ways, if you have a bigger crowd then there's more work to be done otherwise you'll get anykind of noises in it, that's why they call it the white church n the bazaar a.k.a flea market .

I've been in this forum for almost half a year and maybe I've posted too many threads, but so far I don't think the forum is junked enough. The forum that matters (indie business and news/announcement) still have good quality and I did get good results/knowledge from posting there.

[JPGinLA]

What is the purpose of this poll? The owners,admins, mods have announced that they have deferred to Dan (who pulls the laboring oar) and he has announced that he will stick to his guns and implement a subscription.

Isn't this poll just noise?

-JPG

BTW, I wouldn't be willing to do all the work required here so I again applaud all the work, thought and effort. I do respectfully disagree that a subscription is going to solve the problem. But, alas, I add to the noise ...

[dima]

You should add some type of content control, and let people write articles/collumns, which should be rated by anyone else, let people edit and refine them if errors need to be fixed, and you have a nice resource on your hands. I would think that plenty of people would choose to write something, and if it's complete crap, you don't have to allow it to be published, and it's not, others can rate.

Let people sumbit other types of content; links, code snipplets, small articles, anything... then summarise it, and put it in the right place, or automate it. Content is key if you want to educate people. Take one of the new threads about replays as an example, where James posted at the end, saying that what was asked didn't get answered, but instead a whole bunch of very useful info was spilled, and ask James, he found that info to be very useful to someone who didn't know it already. Now..., people might not even have reached that info, because the title of the thread is alightly different. But if you had a nice section, where I could pick 'Game Replays' or something, and find all the goodies there, then it would be truly resourceful.

Anyways, true organized content is what you really need, and a good links section.

[Mike Wiering]

I don't know what the payment options will be, but I can't pay by credit card, I still don't have one, really!

In some countries, credit cards just aren't as common as in the US, and I never thought I'ld need one, until after I started my company. I could have easily gotten one before when I was still a student or when I had a full time job. But as an indie it's much more complicated (most banks require a copy of your salary counterfoil with the application). I've applied twice and eventhough I thought I met the conditions, both times I only recieved a letter saying that my income wasn't stable enough. Now I sometimes ask a friend to do Internet payments for me, but I'ld hate to bother him for something like this.

I'm sure there are more indies world-wide who have this problem, and those are people who would benefit from these boards. Spammers might simply use fraudulous creditcard numbers and get in anyway.

About the poll, I'ld probably still read this forum now and then but not post anymore. What should I vote?


I'ld suggest requiring any new member to write a few paragraphs of text about him/herself (sort of like the "roll call" thread). Tell them to come back after three days to see if they have been approved. I'm sure you'ld filter out most people you wouldn't want this way.

[Sirrus]

I'ld suggest requiring any new member to write a few paragraphs of text about him/herself (sort of like the "roll call" thread). Tell them to come back after three days to see if they have been approved. I'm sure you'ld filter out most people you wouldn't want this way.

Although I'd be happy to pay the amount, I agree to this suggestion.

[Black Hydra]

-svero - You say that the moderation would be too hard? Then I think you need to get some more moderators. Maybe you could do what was said earlier, and have some people that you feel are responsible and mature and they can temporarily suspend threads, to help out.

I used to be a member of another website that had a very active forum and community base (8000 members now I believe). However, despite that they were very large and the topic was of a kind that could easily turn to spam, the moderators have continued to maintain the forums in peak shape, by not allowing crap to go on.

I think having some sort of probabtionary period for new members so that they can post, but all their posts must be checked over before actually getting made may also remove the unwanted. Once a moderator feels that the person is a responsible individual then that person can be a regular poster? Or perhaps the post can only be made once someone who has been flagged by the moderators as being a mature individual feels it can go onto the forums? That might lighten the load for you guys? That way only these 'Senior Members' can actually look through the posts, checking them off so that the masses can read them if they are of any use. Perhaps doing this just with new threads may be even easier...

[ggambett]

Again, I like Black Hydra's suggestion (hmmm, I'm starting to see a pattern). By the way, if more mods or even mini-mods are needed, I volunteer. I already check the forums far too much, so at least I could do it productively!

[dima]

How about to get posting privelages, one needs to write a small/large article/content-contribution on gamedev or indie, and if approved by the mods, one gets posting privelages. i would be more than happy to write something on technical side or graphics, and I'm sure everyone will find something to contribute. This way, you get your content to show and the screening process for poster privelages.

What you think?

[Chris Evans]

I'm another one of those people who would pay, but don't think it's a good idea for the forum.

Plus what exactly are we trying to solve? I think this move is a little too reactionary and doesn't address many of the real problems. Here are the problems as I see it in order of importance (some already mentioned).

- Idealogical Clashes (ie. pissing contests) : Usually these threads had good intentions and also have some good nuggets hidden, but the noise and emotions run too high, which just drags everything (including forum moral) down. I'm guessing the recent commotion over "negativity" is the reason we are even having this discussion. Unfortunately, a subscription will do nothing to curb these threads in the future. In fact, people will probably feel more entitled to their opinion because they paid their $1.
-1 for subscription model

- Misinformation: A lot of us make assumptions (usually about portals) even though we may have little experience with the subject matter. Get a few like-minded people with the same assumptions and all of a sudden the assumption becomes a fact. This hinders our forum from being a valuable resource. Unfortunately, a subscription model isn't going to solve the misinformation problem either. In fact, it might even make it worse. The misinformation doesn't come from newbies, it comes from regular members. It's usually a new signup (like the Snood Guy) that comes in and corrects the misinformation. They're probably not going to pay a $1 just correct information to a private little club. They're probably not going to even contact a mod or member about it, they'll just delete their forum bookmark and speak ill-will of us.

The real problem (which has been said many times already) is that we don't have an easily readable resource to view all the valuable and factual information that's accumulated in the forum. There's the search utility and that's it. The search doesn't always work great and someone brought up a great example about the discussion on game replays. There's some good stuff here that just goes unnoticed for whatever reason. Instead of letting it slide into obscurity, why not put into a resource article. Revitalize and promote the IndieWiki.
-1 Subscription model

- Successful Independents or portal producers, lurking but not posting: I think some of the mods take this problem a little too personally. But the thing is many of the successful people such as Tom (goodsol) don't really need to spend much time in a community asking advice. They can maybe exchange some tips with other pros, but usually that's limited. For the most part, they already know what works for them. The ASP has a $100 membership, but when I was a member last year, I still didn't see Tom or Steve Pavilina post there much either. They outgrew the ASP just like some of have outgrown this forum. It's not an insult to either organization, it's just they transcended most of the information provided.

Also some people like to give back and others don't. When you're successful, you can do one of three things. Give back and help newer aspiring independent developers (like James C. Svero, and Brian). Or you can whine about all the wannabes (like Joe from BraveTree [sorry I'm picking on you. ]. Or you can mostly lurk and drop a gold nugget every once in awhile (like Goodsol).

People like Joe probably haven't accepted their "elder" status yet, so they get frustrated that they're unable to get a lot of useful information from the forum. I don't know how a subscription model would help this.

As for game producers at portals, they're much too busy to post here regularly anyway (if they're even allowed). $1 fee won't fix that. The mods also said a few of them don't want to be in long drawn out debates that don't go anywhere. Again, a $1 fee won't curb this.

I realize the mods have lot of people chattering in their ears, but unless you turn this place into a small exclusive club, you're only going to get so much participation from these people.
-1 Subscription model

- Newbie Posts: This is probably the only problem the subscription model addresses. But how often do we really have clueless newbies trying to build the next EverQuest/Final Fantasy/Doom 3? It's actually quite rare. Surely nothing to panic over. We have a lot of repetitive posts from newer members, but as mentioned before, putting up articles/Wiki would help solve this.

Instead of a subscription model, I think a waiting day period is much more effective. People just fill out a 3 field form, name, website, and comments. If the member seems okay, the mods approve the account in 48 hours. If we have enough resources available, people will look around more carefully for the answer to their question while they wait 48 hours. It prevents them from making a shotgun post.

It worked on me recently. I was about to ask apparently a very basic question on a Flash message board. But they had a 48 hour waiting period. So I signed up, but I kept looking for the answer and I found it 30 minutes later in the archive. When my registration was approved, I was able to ask far better questions. However, if I was able to post instantly (I would have actually paid a dollar at the time) then I just would have added to the "noise" to that forum.


My Suggestion: No invite system. Just make everybody fill out a small form with their website URL, nothing complicated. Then approve the accounts after 48 hours. Link to the IndieWiki on every page and keep it up to date. Delete obvious "noob" posts if they make it in. Close threads where the emotions may run high before they spiral out of control. Greatly discourage one-liners. Up the minimum character/word count per post if necessary. Continue to relocate threads to their appropriate forum. Then take a deep breath.

If managed to read my entire rant, give yourself a cookie.

[tolik]

I was moderating huge forums for years and had same problems as here, even worse. I fully understand the position of administrators and moderators and also do believe 1$ entry fee will solve a lot of problems. I guess our beloved admins forgot to mention that entry fee will be returned to whoever violates the rules and user will become read only again.

Information for those who are still confused.

It's very hard to ban or spank any user on such "professional" level forums. One man from company X moderating this forum can't spank another man from company Y since it'll open a debates related to professional hate and flame.

That's why there's a proposal to create a set of generic and obvious rules. Instead of checkbox "Yes, I do agree", you actually commit 1$ (which then might be given back to the community as prizes). If you are shamelessly violating the rules, your $ will be returned. That way nobody will be able to complain that "these pesky admins don't like my company" or whatever. Everybody will agree on rule violation and fully understand what happened and why user was depromoted.

[Dan MacDonald]

I think it's been mentioned before, but I did some searching and www.somethingawful.com uses an almost identical model (except they charge $10). I was not aware that something awful had forums when I was thinking about ways to solve the problems that are escalating. In fact I just assumed given the content of that site (just go there and look I can't really describe it), that running a forum would be impossible. Instead when I check the forums out it's a fairly well run forum, and despite pretty much every thread being what we would consider "noise", it's very on topic noise and the discussion is really quite cordial. Not to mention that the have 57k users and more users actually reading the forums then we have members.

The point is not to become like somethingaweful, they seem to have 5-10 people banned every 24hrs. I can see how that would be necessary given the types of people they would attract. The point of bringing them up as an example is to show that the system can work and scale in an extreme case. If one of the largest flame bait sites on the Internet can run a decent forum using this model, surely a community of independent developers and members of the downloadable games industry can use the same one effectively.

emuLynx seems to understand the issues pretty well. I also run a game community and we routinely have to ban people for just being plain horrible. I get emails every day from people begging me to unban them. Banning is a pretty severe slap in the fact to whoever gets banned. A lot of the issues that degrade the forums aren't really bannable offenses. It's not like we want to totally remove the person from the community for ever and ever. Just take away posting rights either for a defined period or or more permanently.