Last I checked, Wikipedia also doesn't require Admins to approve all new users. Unless something's changed since I first signed up over there.

...which is assuming guilt before innocence. Sounds quite draconian to me. Most people who join are not trolls and make useful edits. Sorry, but once again, NO.

At this point, what you are doing is "championing" a cause because you can't seem to admit you're wrong.

The Solution here is simple YOU DO IT or shut the hell up.

That's a very hostile way to treat somebody who is solution oriented, especially since it's your complaint I'm trying to help you with. I've planted the seed of an idea, how about we encourage others to continue the process of creating something collectively instead of shouting down somebody who's actually trying to think of something.

How about you do something about it shut the hell up, seeing as it bothers you in the first place. And if you don't want my input, or anyone else's, then don't post on a public forum. If it really is an administrative issue, then take it up with the other admins and try to come up with a solution yourselves. That what you're supposed to do, administrate. We're just the forums over here. I'm just an idea man, a hypothesist. I've done my part in this collaboration, that's what a wiki is supposed to be anyway, a collaboration.

Wow, POI, you just do not know when to quit, do you?

Do you want to be the pot or kettle? We've told you that your solution is not practical, and you haven't managed to address the shortcomings, other than to suggest that someone else figure them out. And even if your "solution" didn't have issues, it's the message board equivalent of trying to perform root canal with a jackhammer.

Except that it's not for the message board, it's for the main site.

Set a simple criteria for submissions, minimum number of words and/or photographs. Anything less than that would be automatically detected and thrown out. It's essentially a word counter. Anything decent that gets through wouldn't even need to be read in depth by an admin. Give it a glance over and if it looks like some effort was put in, then let it through. It'll go up as a normal page and be subject to the normal editing process by the rest of the members, the new guy gets in, everybody's happy.

Toss in a spellchecker to automatically delete lengthy submissions consisting of "adsf ljs sdlkf alsdasdlfih a;sd".

You all keep saying that this is going to increase manhours spent on the site, but there doesn't seem to be any argument that can be made to back that up. It just seems to be a case of "we don't want to deal with it", even though you already are dealing with it, just in a less direct, more tedious and (for MPM) frustrating way.

Actually WE (as in WE) don't have the administrative rights to do so. Such a thing would have to be done by Bunni for he ALONE has the administrative rights. So you're saying that WE are not dealing with it, when you don't seem to understand that WE (i.e. all the mods) don't have the power to make that sort of change to the site.

Then ask him to do it. Ask him to do something. Where do you even think these rants of yours on the forums are ever going to go?

Here's an idea. Feel free to ignore ALL my rants? Can you do that? Is that possible for you to do? Just a thought.

Yeah. No one is forcing you to read them

You are a very angry person.

Nobody's forcing anybody to read anything so why complain about any of it?

You confuse anger with frustration. You are a very frustrating person. Personally, I'm getting really tired of dealing with you, too.

Tell me, have you EVER heard of a Wiki that even has this sort of system? Especially one with as few staff as ourselves?

And you keep dwelling on the practicality aspect of our argument while ignoring the moral component. Treating all registered users like malicious spammers is simply unfair. If we adopted your idea, then we'd look like a huge bunch of assholes, and most of us on here don't aspire to be seen as assholes. Of course, since you clearly are an asshole (either that or someone with a serious case of Asperger's Syndrome), I guess this is a tough idea for you to grasp.

It's a discussion, nothing to get frustrated over. Chill.

Nothing wrong with being innovative.

You mean unregistered users. If somebody's registered it means they've passed the test.

A: I don't have Asperger's Syndrome.
B: I don't think anybody's going to get their feelings hurt because they're not allowed to edit a website.
C: "Due to a recent increase in vandalism, we here at IMFDB have decided to institute a policy of...etc." Tada, we're not assholes, we have high expectations of quality from our users. It's all subjective.
D: I don't actually care one way or another if this or anything like this is ever implemented. It's an idea for IMFDB I'm discussing on a discussion forum for discussing the daily goings-on of IMFDB. It's a discussion. An idea, a brainstorming. I'm not making a beer hall putsch here, just tossing it out into the aether and refining it as a whole as more issues are raised.

Yeah, you do, or else you'd realize why we find you so annoying. We've told you no, we've explained why, and you insist on dragging on a discussion no one cares about. With that being said, I am closing this topic.

And yes, point taken that I meant "unregistered users". I was kinda tired when I wrote that post (and annoyed, which should be obvious).

For the record, we have discussed banning unregistered users in the past, and repeatedly concluded that it's not practical or desirable.