Referral code needed | Referral code requests | Consumer forum

cellgoof said:

Art, I didn't know you were named as referral code cop! Personally, I resent your PMs and innuendo.You;re a hair's breadth away from an abuse report to the site admin for harrassment. If you feel the rules are being ignored by certain ppl feel free to report them to he site admin for any further action.

Once again you demonstrate the reason for me referring to you as a whiner...have a great day

Peter has been away due to a family emergency, and he suggested I do just what I did while he is away. He even provided the link to use to send people to, which I cut and pasted into my reply.

He and I have been in private discussions for weeks about how the referrals can be distributed more fairly, not because it is something for my benefit (I have used the referral system once in 3 months) but because the consensus of the members and users here is that a fairer method was desired. The idea of the new rules was to try to get people to do the right thing without additional enforcement, and provide a very fair approach (one referral a week) with the hope that people would be decent about the intent of the rules. Peter asked me to remind people who were either unaware or ignoring the new rules and send them to the new rules, which is what I did. It appears some people can't get the idea of a social agreement that doesn't require enforcement, and instead look for loopholes unless the system doesn't allow it to happen. That's a pity. The guest access to this forum seems to be a potential problem developing if people are not willing to do the right thing, and I will be asking Peter to consider looking at it. Clearly, this website is Peter's and all decisions are his. I think he is really trying to be both a good guy and allow for fairness for as many people as possible, and who can argue with that?

When good things grow organically and the number of people involved get broader, unfortunately, there will usually be some who want to get more than their fair share simply because they can, and then rules and enforcement become issues as well as how broad the freedoms of access can be. Again, it is a pity.

If people have switched from acquiring too many referrals with their membership names to getting around the new rules by using guest accounts, that was not the intent of the new rules and I will discuss with the Admin the possibility if more adjustments to reduce that can help in his intent.

If you feel my PMs to you were abusive, Cellgoof, forward them to Peter so he can look them over, but please make sure to forward the full content of both our comments, so he gets the full picture. I also have the full content available.

Everything in this post are my words and do not necessarily represent the Admin's sentiments.

Cheers,

Art

I didn't want to make this into a prolonged discussion, but I do want to clarify a couple of things. I am not a "referral cop", and I am also not the only person who is doing some watching. If you read some other recent posts you will see that at least one other person noticed an issue and took it upon himself to post a notice of the new rules.

During the earlier discussions, the majority of the people who where using a large chunk of the referrals (about 5 people were getting about 20 referrals a month, on average) the comments from many of those people were "the rules allow for it, so don't whine about it". Well, Peter saw the problem and made a minor change in the rules which would better allow for fairer distribution, and all I am doing is trying to inform people of the change. I am not enforcing anything. Now, some of the same major referrers who claimed "the rules allowed it" are either ignoring the new rules, getting around them with guest referrals, or basically implying that if there can't be enforcement and others are taking advantage of loopholes, that it "isn't fair" and they should therefore be allowed to do the same.

It does put those earlier justifications by some members about the rules into question. What it says is that some people, regardless of "rules" or expectations from the Admin and others here, will find any way they can to get what they want and they really don't care about the other members and users of this forum. So, this isn't about rules or breaking them, it is about some people who will do whatever they 'need' to get what they want whether it is fair to others or not.

What I get from Peter is he doesn't wants to lay down a lot of rules. We wouldn't need car alarms if people simply respected the rights of the owners and left a car that wasn't theirs alone. Yet there are always people who seem to think that if a car is left with unlocked doors, or with the keys in it, that the car "deserves" to be stolen. What does that say about the car owner; that he's an idiot for trusting people? Or is the thief still simply a thief?

For now, Peter is choosing to trust people. Personally, I like that, BUT, for that to work people have to be trustworthy or have pressure placed on them so they realize what is expected of them here, not just by me, but by the majority of users. Just because the guest accounts aren't being monitored now is no excuse for people to misuse the privilege this website is offering.

What I have been doing is informing and reminding people of the new rules. Peter doesn't appear to be monitoring the referral situation, to my knowledge, and he is allowing others, like myself, who took an interest in changing some of the rules to keep a watchful eye. I have no idea what the Admin would/will do if people don't come on board with the new rules and instead end up using loopholes to further their "wants", but I will continue to further these discussions with Peter, if the situation doesn't improve.

So, no, I am not a "referral cop", but you ARE half right, I am "a jerk" who takes this seriously enough to watch what's going on and report back to Peter about it, and in turn, Peter has offered that I can inform or remind people about the new rules. Because it seems for every jerk like me there are numerous other jerks who take advantage of situations no matter how inappropriate or unfair it is. Simply put, I'd gladly not be a 'cop' if there weren't any 'criminals'.

Art