See a lot of first time posts dedicated to a hosting review. I don't think many people find these to be too reliable, but unfortunately some customers get suckered and later on burned by going on that review.

WHT has rules such as 5 posts required before posting links or sending pm's. Why can't there be a minimal posting requirement before submitting a host review? Get rid of some of the hit and runners.

Just a thought. This may have been discussed already, but I didn't find anything on a search.

It's a very good idea... But I think unless the post count required to post reviews is drastically higher than 5 we'll just have the added problem of garbage responses/spam to get to that count of 5... Same thing we have with URLs now...

Might be interesting to discuss though.

If a user comes here just to leave a review, why make him spam the board with 20 or 50 useless posts before allowing him to make that review?

I think users should have to make a minimum 5 posts before they can post.

I think perhaps requiring mods to pre-approve the first 5 posts for new users would cut down on the amount of spam that wht currently gets.

Originally posted by Chicken
I think users should have to make a minimum 5 posts before they can post. If this was out-of-context, I would agree completely. :D

Originally posted by ExtremeIS
I think perhaps requiring mods to pre-approve the first 5 posts for new users would cut down on the amount of spam that wht currently gets.
I recall a time when I was a moderator here (many, many moons ago), that we tried to moderate posts for a particular forum for a short bit (can't remember why). From what I can recall, you just see a list of posts, and the username. I don't even think it indicates where the post is going to be submitted, if it's a new thread, or anything. In other words, it's out of context, thus more or less pointless.

That's from memory though and I could be mistaken.