Quote (Madotsuki @ Feb 18 2017 02:26pm)
You aren't wrong in what you say about the screening process, though what I said does remain true. Perhaps I'd have been more accurate in saying that you pay money to be put forward for eligibility, but this is still a service rendered even if the end result is subject to approval (think of it like paying to be being put into a lottery). The bottom line is that you pay and you get something, so 'privilege' doesn't really apply unless we (as HardyTarget touched on a lot better than me) consider the 'privilege' aspect to be something a little less tangible, like the quality of the userbase. Otherwise, I can't perceive why admission might be deemed a 'privilege' if it comes at a cost. This is a customer relationship, as the site clearly bills itself (nowadays anyway).
Obviously the site is not a democracy and nothing is protected or guaranteed by the site or its staff, so I think the argument about what admins are 'entitled' to do is moot. Admins are entitled to do anything they please. The fact can make discussion seem a little valueless, but for my own opinion, I feel that payment should result in guaranteed and permanent admission into the unfortunately termed 'donor forum', as fitting with the self-styled 'customer' model Paul is creating.
Yeah, I understand your point of view. I look at it like this:
Quote
The bottom line is that you pay and you get something
You pay
for a chance to get something, very different imo. I think that's where we differ. You already get the forum gold as a rendered service, but have a chance at something. That chance becomes a privilege because
it's a screening process. But I understand your point of view, and to be honest it can probably go both ways.
That's why in the first page I said this shouldn't be discussed, it's an administrative internal decision
This post was edited by JohnMiller92 on Feb 18 2017 04:39pm
Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.