what is with all the guest initial entries?

We seem to have an awful lot of initial entries from unregistered users. I can understand a hit from an unregistered user but initial entries? What gives? This one makes me especially suspicious http://www.trackdollar.com/report.htm?url=BH3BA17D769081FC6B5525D4340A1A034C6CB6BB40&sess=00F9C40DAF

Oh and Beverly hills 90210 was one of the worst shows ever made how on earth did it stay on the air so long?

Maybe it is an idiot who doesn't know that there is no way for them to get hit notifications unless he/she registers.

I figured it was several idiots.

Matt_How wrote:I figured it was several idiots.

Could be.

Seems like the program should prevent guest Initial Entries, and should direct them to register if they wish to enter new bills.

I like that idea. Unless they sign up, they can't enter an original bill. What's everyone else think?

I agree, Tony. Even just adding a registration step to their initial bill entering might help identify who these folks are and pehaps get them as part of our community.

dctim wrote:I agree, Tony. Even just adding a registration step to their initial bill entering might help identify who these folks are and pehaps get them as part of our community.

Exactly.
Besides...if they do not register, how do they expect to ever be notified of Hits? And even if it did then get hit...who would get credit for the hit?

I agree with Tony too although I would also favor not doing this if it is somehow advantageous not too. I wonder what Markus thinks?That is who counts anyway. I can see reasons for and against it.

Exactly. It is junk data, because you can't track it if you are not registered (who would get the credit for the hit, when it DID get hit...and how would the original entrant of the bill be notified of the hit...if they were not registered? so there's no point in allowing unregistered people to enter bills, it's just stupid.

W5WMW wrote:

Tony wrote:I like that idea. Unless they sign up, they can't enter an original bill. What's everyone else think?

There's no reason for a user to enter bills first if they're unregistered, since they can't track them. It just creates mostly useless junk data.

Where's George instituted that policy a few months ago (WG 2.4), so that you must be registered to be the first enterer of a bill. I agreed with that policy change.

I would not want to go with the system WG has. It is an extra step and extra steps annoy me. It now takes even more time to enter a bill over there, it is just a pain in the butt is all it is. I wan to speed up entering the bills not slow it down. I will certainly always enter wilds i get over there but as far as initial entries it just isn't enjoyable anymore because of the hoops you have to jump through now. It is not an improvement. Here if an unregistered user enters a bill, initial entry or not it already tells the user that they need to register in order to track that bill for themselves. What I had in my mind was a similar message coming up if someone is not logged in that ONLY comes up if not logged in and if it is not someone giving a hit it will declare you need to be registered to do the first entry. I am not in favor of all entries being from registered users. This is because some people may feel they may be, in a sense, incriminating themselves by registering. What I mean is that they do not wish to register because they either feel they will get spammed or they think anther site they are on might get rid of them if they join this one yet they still wish to give a hit. i am also in favor of keeping it as it is if Markus finds it better that way. I was thinking too if entries could be blocked automatically if the zip used is clearly wrong, this is if this can be determined automatically and I am not certain it can.

No one is suggesting requiring registration to give a hit on an already-entered bill.

what is being suggested is a requirement of registration to INITIALLY ENTER a bill. and I can't see what the problem with this would be.

After all...once again...with an initial entry, no one is getting a hit. The bill can't be tracked by the person who entered it, because the system doesn't know. So it's just pointless junk data.

Do you not understand what IS...and is NOT....being suggested here?

Kalisiin wrote:No one is suggesting requiring registration to give a hit on an already-entered bill.

what is being suggested is a requirement of registration to INITIALLY ENTER a bill. and I can't see what the problem with this would be.

After all...once again...with an initial entry, no one is getting a hit. The bill can't be tracked by the person who entered it, because the system doesn't know. So it's just pointless junk data.

Do you not understand what IS...and is NOT....being suggested here?

I was merely clerifying

OK. Because it sounded as if you thought it was being suggested that to hit bills one had to be registered...and that was NOT what was being suggested...just that they would have to register to INITIALLY ENTER a bill. Which really makes perfect sense. After all, who gets credit for a guest initial entry? No one. How could the system notify the entrant of the hit? It couldn't. so it would be nothing but junk data, really.

Absolutely guests should be able to hit "already entered" bills without registering.