Show menu
Shooting People
By continuing to browse this website you are agreeing to allow us to use cookies

Should we limit the number of posts a person can respond to in a month?

Some of the worst jobs are written by those who seem to spam the "get people" section with "expenses only" or "low pay" projects that never get made.

Also, some terrible answers to questions are added by people who seem to try to answer everything.

While I appreciate the helpful people who actually do know a lot on a lot of topics, perhaps we should put some limits, to ensure the conversation is more diverse. Perhaps if someone is really helpful, they can have those limits raised.

At the very least, those who place "expenses only" projects should only be able to ask for a writer/editor/sound designer/main actor every six months or so. I mean, at least finish your first project before starting the next. And, the lower your budget, the longer it takes to complete a project (that is assuming you want it to be any good).

  • I have been thinking about this, and I'd have to disagree to be honest, we've no place gatekeeping comments or discussions, and indeed I'd love to see more people getting involved on the Ask and Discuss boards, regardless of experience.

    As for "get people"/"get work", there's the occasional gem, and you can always filter for paid work (although let's face it, it's not union rates, let's say!). I flick through once in a while, rarely apply for anything and sometimes will contact a member with a suggestion. And I think that offline element is useful for SP, and who am I that my words are worth more than anyone else. After all back when SP was merely a mailing list all that time ago, I learnt a lot from other members.

    Later today I'm having a catch-up meet/chat with a guy I met on this site nearly 5 years ago who got in touch the other week as some of his projects are nearing production time from his applying as a runner on one of my projects all that time ago! I know I'm straying off topic a little here, but I'd hate to think we'd limit anyone from making chance encounters and new contacts by gatekeeping. I think that's what I'm stumbling around trying to say!

    2 years ago
  • No Vasco. In any serious arena it be a bit sinister. I think Paddy's nailed it though. Even though we do have to tolerate the occasional eccentric and unpleasant contribution it usually provides for a bit of colurful lampooning.

    2 years ago
  • After checking the last thirty posts interestingly Vasco has posted more times than anyone else...five times in fact. OK I came in second place with three. I'm with Paddy and John on this one.

    2 years ago
  • Just thought I'd post Just to get on the ratings board! lol I agree with Paddy et al.

    2 years ago
  • Eight months on and counting and the irony continues (said with emphatic intonation as the V.O. at the end of each "Apprentice" episode)...Vasco you have posted over thirty posts, more than double the next highest poster to the "Discuss" list since you posted this point of discussion re limiting the amount of posts people were making? Apologies that I came in second place, but then I did release a new dramatic feature and film and also a festure length documentary in that time, promote and thank other collaborating shooters, annouce premiere and other screening dates. I promise to post a lot less for the next eight months.
    Regards Ray

    2 years ago
    • Good point about me posting too much.

      Another feature that may be useful is the ability to save discussions, like we had in the old days (and we have for jobs and has finally returned for pitches.) This could be a good cool off.

      2 years ago