Spaz here. The backend database for the forums lost its goddam mind, so this is the only way I can include Steph's original post in this thread. Really sorry about this folks, I promise the new site will have a more robust database backend. And sorry to HB for hijacking his post for this edit.

I like this idea. Lends some credence to Blaze's crusade against "useless" threads, but you've already come up with a solution to that particular problem. Seems like a neat way to open up the rest of the site to more community focused approach.

I certainly don't mean to criticise, but I'm not sure how much of a fan I am of having to "earn" the content when I'm already paying for a subscription. I'm not anti-community by any means, and I do think the idea is very cool, but I'm not sure how much time I'll have to contribute to the active community, and I'd hate to think that I'll be locked out of content because of this.

Oh, well that certainly clears that up right quick. In that case, consider my vote a thumbs up.

And on that note, I really should try to be a tad more active in the community.

This is actually something I was going to comment on. The way I'd understood it, there would be places that were locked until you earned enough points. And this is where the cynic and the curmugeon in me kicked in. That this isn't the case is partly reassuring.

While the interactive "earn access" idea is definitely neat, the cynic in me questions how much it'll actually get used. The current forums are a good example: there are over 5600 registered members, but only about 30 or so people who post with any kind of frequency, and probably only about a dozen that can really be called "regular posters". The cynic in me asks: when people aren't willing to pay $6 for a monthly membership (which is dirt-cheap), are they really going to put in all the effort it'll take to earn enough points to access the site? I'd predict that the people who will be earning the most points are the people who are already active members of the "StG Community"--and are already paying for their memberships. You've got people working on stuff for you, and they're the types not to care about earning points.

I understand what you're trying to do--and it's a noble endeavor--but I think one of the great things about the community that's grown up here is that it's not about rewards, it's not about gimmicks. It's a bunch of people who have become, and are, friends. We help each other out because we're all part of the same community. Because we're friends.

And, well.. the curmugeon in me kinda resents the [hyperbole]"I tossed the ring on the bottle and won the cupie doll, now I'm part of the group"[/hyperbole] concept.

I tend to agree with Blaze on this one Steph, the people who care enough to subscribe probably enjoy the exclusivity of supporting the site and the ability to quite easily interact with you!

The subscription fees should definately rise to represent the value that paid membership provides. You could even look at capping the number of paid memberships at some point in the future to ensure that you are able to still enjoy conversing with us and not feel that there are too many paid members to really *communicate* with?

Unfortunately we can't clone you with current technology... lol :)

I'm just throwing this thought out there as a brainstorm-type deal. I don't even know if this appeals to you, but it's worth a shot...

The point in the membership subscription is primarily to pay for bandwidth, yes? Cost of streaming, hardware, storage...basically a/v content.

I imagine that if someone was paying, they'd want access to all videos and images. Rightfully so, of course :) But then there are people who don't care for the porn-type stuff nearly as much as community, interaction, and you. Like...your draw is essentially beauty + brains/personality. You could roughly divide your site viewers into three groups. First, there's people who just think you're hot and have kinks that are compatible with the memberships site (bondage, girl/girl, erotica, amateur, etc). There's people who don't really care about the audio-visual content and happened upon the site because they love your CD or your posts on Gizmodo. And then there's a third group which is into both -- sometimes because of synergy between the two, i.e. your sexy pics are hotter when they find out you're a techie and a musician.

So paid members automatically get access to all a/v content. But then, what if you had more personal textual stuff that requires points to access? For example, a members blog or similar. Or more community-oriented stuff. Depending on your comfort level, this might actually make your site more open rather than less. I'm thinking of my own livejournal. It's friends-only, but I'll add anyone who fills out my little survey. I don't care to restrict who can and can't read my journal. Rather, I just want to ensure that anyone there cared enough to take the time to introduce themselves, and aren't a random troll (or coworker or family member) cruising by. So this allows me to be incredibly frank, moreso than if I made everything public.

So if people earned points for interacting, digging around, basically showing that they are interested in YOU...perhaps you could have aspects of yourself on the site that you normally keep off-limits. And it still seems fair to paying members, who pay for the content that, well, costs money.

Of course this is contingent upon YOUR interest, and whether or not you share my apprehensions regarding public textibitionism.

As I know you're taking a more community-oriented spin on the new site, I think that private forums (or whatever) that are safe from trolls and passerbys could also help members open up. I see no reason why paying members should demand access to that...though I'm sure they will ;)

I understand that. I was just using the members-to-posters ratio as an example of the "passive" vs "interactive" aspect of viewship.

Someone may have said this already but have you ever considered doing a podcast? :)