I have a quibble. When you purchase software, you purchase (in this case) the ability to use the software beyond a certain number of profiles, and are allowed to submit profiles and vote on them. As a bonus, purchasers can post in nearly all forums. Even they must be approved to post in the rules forum, the plug-in forum and others. I see some aspects as a right, others as a privlege of becoming a member.

If you buy a driver's license, you may drive. If you misbehave while driving, you might get your driving privleges suspended or revoked. If you fail to be civil, even on a forum you've paid to be a member of, I believe it's reasonable to limit, suspend or revoke your posting privleges.

If I buy a car and I use it to assult someone, the vehicle may be confiscated. And I probably won't get my payment back either.

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
The next question, that I must ask.

Since Ken has set up the New User forum, for the free users, aren't all the users here now paid subscribers?

Doesn't that make this part of the fee paid for the program?

I had a quick look and I couldn't find a licensing agreement here on the site. But the feature list doesn't include the forum:

http://invelos.com/dvdpro/Registration.aspx

So I think the forum is more of a free service provided to loyal customers, and not so much a paid feature. Fine line perhaps, but Invelos wouldn't be the first company to provide free incentives to their customers.

On top of that there's the forum rules that has a list of bannable offenses. So even if the forum were to be counted as a paid feature, it's still within Invelos' rights to ban users from it. Much like a company like Microsoft can ban paid subscribers from their Xbox Live service if they break the EULA.

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
The next question, that I must ask.

Since Ken has set up the New User forum, for the free users, aren't all the users here now paid subscribers?

Doesn't that make this part of the fee paid for the program?

While Ken does hold the license, and grants us permission to use the program, the online DB and the Forums, for the fee of $30us (A heck of a deal), wouldn't a permanent ban be restricting the license use of that user?

Just asking...

Based on my experience, mostly with gaming software forums, the use of the forum is a bonus and not included in the price of the software.  I have seen people permabanned from the forums, but not the game, because they violated the forum ToS but not the game ToS.

I don't know why it would be any different here.

Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:

Quote:
I'd be glad to chip in for a refund if needed.

Would this be for any banned member, or only certain ones?

Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:
Anyway, I think that there should be a way to deal with people that insist on voting "no" on perfectly GOOD contributions.

I got a few no votes on contributions that still got an approval.

We've been told by Invelos in the past that people's voting history is taken into account when considering subsequent votes.
So people who consistently vote contrary to the screeners' decisions will find that their votes will carry less weight in the future.

Edit: that's why you should never consider a "no" vote to be a deal-breaker though if you think you need to, you can edit your contribution notes to address it.

Moderator please remove the above post

Sorry but it isn't because of whatever answer gave by Ace (never read it before the moderation) that it's a targetted attack. I, for one, had certainly not targeted a particular user by voting that a change is needed fast (as a large majority of the voters already).

Seriously where is the problem if the system became a real serious credible one and not a joke anymore? If you behave you haven't a single chance to be suspended and the large majority of the members do (how many here had seen one of their post moderated? Probably not even 10). But the problem is that some don't like to participate or cast a vote because they don't want to be humiliate publicly. If you think it's a good thing for a software forum we sure think differently...

Quoting AESP_pres:

Quote:
Sorry but it isn't because of whatever answer gave by Ace (never read it before the moderation) that it's a targetted attack. I, for one, had certainly not targeted a particular user by voting that a change is needed fast (as a large majority of the voters already).

Seriously where is the problem if the system became a real serious credible one and not a joke anymore? If you behave you haven't a single chance to be suspended and the large majority of the members do (how many here had seen one of their post moderated? Probably not even 10). But the problem is that some don't like to participate or cast a vote because they don't want to be humiliate publicly. If you think it's a good thing for a software forum we sure think differently...

You are right, hence my term of some.  You have not personally made this about anybody.  You do have to admit, that there are some here that are making it very personal, and it is those people that I worry about.


Charlie