Spout Moderators

Membership styles, what works for you?

There are four different membership models for groups. Open membership, invitation only by owner, invitation only by member, or requested membership. Different people use different models, what works for you and why? Do you think the kind of membership model you select influences the kind of group you are going to have?

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

csprague:

There are four different membership models for groups. Open membership, invitation only by owner, invitation only by member, or requested membership. Different people use different models, what works for you and why? Do you think the kind of membership model you select influences the kind of group you are going to have?

I think all of the groups I have created or are moderator of are of the open membership style.  If I'm encouraging open participation in my groups, I'm not sure why I would use any of the other models.  It just makes extra work for myself and for others to get involved.  If someone was becoming a problem user (which I haven't observed yet on this site) you can still always ban them right?  I'm not sure what other purpose you would want for requiring invitation in this type of group.

I could understand using the other models if you were starting a group where you only want to invite certain people who are already a part of some other outside group.  Like just a group of your friends or maybe people you were in a class or group with in real life.

But most of the groups I have made are based on topic of discussion rather than some other kind of exclusive membership qualifications.

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

Since I typically tend to be quite remiss in my communication, to constrain someone to dependency on me to get involved in a group is irresponsible on my part and people should be absolutely free to come and go as they please.  Besides, as Risselada pointed out, any other way besides open is just that - more work for the moderator and a rankling hindrance to potential members.  Can't we all just get along?  ;)

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

Risselada:

csprague:

There are four different membership models for groups. Open membership, invitation only by owner, invitation only by member, or requested membership. Different people use different models, what works for you and why? Do you think the kind of membership model you select influences the kind of group you are going to have?

I think all of the groups I have created or are moderator of are of the open membership style.  If I'm encouraging open participation in my groups, I'm not sure why I would use any of the other models.  It just makes extra work for myself and for others to get involved.  If someone was becoming a problem user (which I haven't observed yet on this site) you can still always ban them right?  I'm not sure what other purpose you would want for requiring invitation in this type of group.

I could understand using the other models if you were starting a group where you only want to invite certain people who are already a part of some other outside group.  Like just a group of your friends or maybe people you were in a class or group with in real life.

But most of the groups I have made are based on topic of discussion rather than some other kind of exclusive membership qualifications.

I agree, open membersip, invite your contact list and then start blogging. The thing I love about the spout format is the linking movies capability. Once you have links to movies from your group, it seems to attract a constant flow of attention. I started my group just a couple of weeks ago and it grew to 14 members within the first couple of days.

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

csprague:

There are four different membership models for groups. Open membership, invitation only by owner, invitation only by member, or requested membership. Different people use different models, what works for you and why? Do you think the kind of membership model you select influences the kind of group you are going to have?

I like to use requested membership in my groups. It lets me keep track of how many people are joining. I can also remember people slightly better since I have to see them and approve them, this makes it easier for me to have discussions with them. It also makes it possible for me to not allow someone in the group if it seems like they aren't going to be someone we want. I haven't really had many problems with this, but there have been a few instances where I've had to reject people that seemed like spammers or like they didn't really understand what the group was about.

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

I have to agree with superdrive0 on this one.   With over 300 members in our Horror Movies 101 group, having people request membership or get invited (kinda) helps me to keep track of who is in here.   Also, as I have mentioned privately to Christi, I have had to expel a couple of people from our group.   This was because they were obvious 'trouble-makers' and idiots (even MORE so than me) and they hated me...   One guy was even sending me death-threats (my first online death-threats! Yay!).   I just felt that it would be better for the greater good of 'the group' to not have these morons in there.   By having people request membership or get invited puts them in my email so I can see who is joining and (perhaps) sniff out some of the 'bad apples' before they get a chance to join and wreak havoc.   It hasn't happened yet but how easy would it be for one of those two morons I kicked out to create a new name and start a new account and join again?   At least with my method I can KINDA watch out for this.   I figure every little bit of security helps.

   While I would agree that the 'open-membership'  model is probably the best, and friendliest, option in an ideal world, the fact of the matter is that Horror Movie fans can be a bit 'unpredictable' to say the least.

                                                                         < GOR >    

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

Phantasma-gore-ia:

Since I typically tend to be quite remiss in my communication, to constrain someone to dependency on me to get involved in a group is irresponsible on my part and people should be absolutely free to come and go as they please.  Besides, as Risselada pointed out, any other way besides open is just that - more work for the moderator and a rankling hindrance to potential members.  Can't we all just get along?  ;)

   Jesus Christ, Robert!   How was Christi able to get you to crawl out from under your rock?   Was it her picture?  (that certainly didn't hurt for me).  

   (Here I go being all charming and shit again)...

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

Dr_Gor:

Phantasma-gore-ia:

Since I typically tend to be quite remiss in my communication, to constrain someone to dependency on me to get involved in a group is irresponsible on my part and people should be absolutely free to come and go as they please.  Besides, as Risselada pointed out, any other way besides open is just that - more work for the moderator and a rankling hindrance to potential members.  Can't we all just get along?  ;)

   Jesus Christ, Robert!   How was Christi able to get you to crawl out from under your rock?   Was it her picture?  (that certainly didn't hurt for me).  

   (Here I go being all charming and shit again)...

Easy tiger...

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

csprague:

Easy tiger...

   Hey, no problem, Christi.   It is just that Robert and I know each other from a LONG ways back...It has been SEVERAL years, Robert!   Can you believe that?   When the **** are you going to fix your fucking website?  

Re:Membership styles, what works for you?

Dr_Gor:

csprague:

Easy tiger...

   Hey, no problem, Christi.   It is just that Robert and I know each other from a LONG ways back...It has been SEVERAL years, Robert!   Can you believe that?   When the **** are you going to fix your fucking website?  

   Sorry again...   my bad...