It reeks of upset juvenile behaviour and they are not funny in AF, ET or otherwise.

When you see a whole page of ET that has been spammed with BS posts by the same Multi - enough is enough. Surely there is a way to filter them out.

No wonder most of the serious football discussion is moving away from FFT. Quantity doesn't equal quality.

Theoretically.. if someone wants to make a multi they'll make a multi, about the only thing that can stop it is moderator approved sign-ups, but even then that's sketchy in case you deny someone legit.

Where is this serious footbal discussino moving pray tell?

There is no easy way to prevent multiple accounts being created.

IP banning would assume IP addresses remain static, but there are few people on static IPs these days.

Another option is to ban the sign-up emails that have been used prior.

Or we could go to a forum where a mod has to approve comments before they are published?

Too tedious.

There's nothing wrong with making and using a multi for humorous reasons.

How would regulars feel about a token fee to post comments on the site?

This is NOT something we have planned - it's just something that came up at a social networking conference in London today.

A site in Prague started charging people 3 Euros a month to post comments on stories. All content was still free. It was hugely popular with users.

As a side issue, it also eliminated a lot of trolls.

As I say, we have no plans to do this. I'm just looking for feedback on the concept.

How about if we also created a dedicated iPhone forum app and threw that in as well for your token $3 or $5 fee a month?



Edited by Kevin Airs: 20/5/2011 12:54:50 AM

Interesting idea. Not sure it'd work in this case.

I recently stopped 1) subscribing and 2) participating in the forum for the Australian gaming magazine PC Powerplay, as a direct result of a completely screwed up forum migration. That's just an aside though.

Tampering with the userbase like this is something that I hope would be very seriously considered, and like you said you aren't planning it, just curious.

It's a gamble, right?

You need to offer something that nobody else offers in order to get that sort of subscription model working. Part of my e-commerce major was spent looking at this sort of thing and it really comes down to whether you have either; a fanatical userbase ala Apple, Salon.com, etc or an offering which nobody else can compete with for free (arguably the NY Times and similar in-depth media outlets)

I'm not sure if 442 is quite there on either count. Your stories are good, but what stops a Joffa on another site just cut and pasting with a quote and then starting a thread there for people to comment on? We do the same there here for TWG and the like.

I'd pay for a 442 iPhone app which bundled up stories, exclusive content (much like the iPad) into a smaller package which included a dedicated forum viewer for a phone.

But a charge to comment on your stories each month? My mind says no.


P.S - you're in London? Or one of your Haymarket UK colleagues?

Hmm. I'd probably pay it as I am quite regular on here, and I believe you'd retain the core fans in that sense, but you'd be at risk of losing a lot of people who just comment sporadically.

So I guess you have to decide whether having 50% less people commenting BUT making money from those 50% is better for you than having a lot of people. It would be controversial no doubt.

I'd be much more open to an iPhone app, probably in preference of a once off payment as opposed to subscription, but that's just me.

I agree 100% with all that f1dave has said.

I wouldn't be opposed to a nominal subscription for the site. If for example it was automatically included with a magazine/ipad subscription that would be worth it. Or if it was truely a nominal amount, like $1 or $2/month that would be fine. Once you go up to $3+ per month it wont feel quite so 'nominal' - but that is just me. Also if the fee was linked directly to website improvement - in other words all income generated by subscription were emarked for use at improving and developing web content - then that would also be attractive. utilising it for more server space, improved bandwidth, higher grade streaming content etc (for example utilising it to get a slice of the internet pie of the HAL, would be a coup for this site if there was a game of the round for the HAL streamed by the site and available only to subscribers).

There are lots of options, but it would fail badly if there was not a plan in place prior to its implementation and that plan would need to be made very, very well known to your users.

A monthly fee sounds interesting. Its a tough one as its a constant payment that would add up. I think for the forums, we just have to accept that we have multis and trolls. Its a sad thing but thats just how the cookie crumbles.

I would definitely pay for a forum app, but would be more open to a one off payment rather than a monthly subscription.

This this this.

I was seriously about to type this word for word.

I really don't think the problem with multis and trolls is anywhere near as serious here as other forums I go to. Making a bit of a mountain out of a molehill, really.

But as far as the other bit - I would definitely pay a fee to have a proper forum app on iphone/android (what's the point of one if you're not going to do the other?) that makes it easier to post from mobiles.

great minds and all that stuff

I wonder why you think that :-k

Absolutely no reason at all. :-"

The iphone app would be great, but i wouldnt pay for it. Also i wouldnt pay per month to use this forum. Just sayin.......

As a developer, that really shits me. Why would you spend $5 on a coffee or $1 on a Mars bar but not $0.99 on an iPhone app? Gah.

Its not that, I dont have a Credit Card so its the way of payment that bothers me. When i wanna buy a paid app, i buy an itunes giftcard. Its not like getting $1 to get a mars bar.

So buy a giftcard (you can usually get $40 card for $30 and other decent deals like that) or get a debit card. I don't have a credit card either.

is it really worth charging money for sake of making maybe $500 a month (i dunno how many users this forum has)jus saying

How can we take soccer blogging seriously if FIFA themselves are f..ked? Lighten up I say. The people at the top (both at FFA and FIFA) can't sort their sh.t out, so you expect us to behave?

No-one has said that on here yet!

I agree mate i love a good troll/multi adds some excitement to place

I say you sad whingers are just as annoying as the multis themselves, just harden the fuck up for fuck's sake. They're not doing any harm to this forum, and there is the occasional multi that is quite funny, seriously, why is this a problem.

Bit of an overreaction Gooner.. the only person who seemed to have a serious problem with it was the OP... KA's discussion about introducing a nominal fee had nothing to do with multis.

And there is a big difference between 'the occasional multi' and one person making dozens of multis and spamming the hell out of this place, and I understand why Mr was annoyed at the time.

:cool:

Where the fuck are you paying $5 for a coffee? :shock:

Is StudzUp a brilliant multi, or just a really bad indictment of mainstream football society?