The reason asking "do you have better recruit policy design" is that you seem to be complaining about this collection game that trackers force us to play. As users, all of us would certainly like to be able to join the site we want to join directly without stepping stone, but the point is not what we want, but to undertand the intentions, considerations, and concerns of the site's staff.
Bad behavior in eyes of tracker staff is not just the inability to seed, or complete HR.
1. Cheating is one aspect, and we do observe that people on cabal sites cheat significantly less or not cheat at all. Does this have anything to do with the recruit policies of them? I think it does.
2. Account and invite trading is another aspect, let's leave it at that.
3. Just like few days ago U2 banned a person who kept reposting U2 exclusive content on nyaa, in the eyes of tracker, reposting exclusive which disallow to repost is also bad behavior.
4. and also deliberately remove the suffix of release group when reposting, or even changed to their own.
........ etc. too lazy to list them all
A successful recruit policy design (again, to tracker staffs, not us members) is to be able to have those who have all these bad behaviors kicked out, or let the members already join to reduce or no longer have these behaviors at least on their sites. They call this member quality control. By this standard, I don't think "collection game" is the best recruit policy design either and I hate it too, but I do understand staffs think it's the least bad one. Statistically speaking, recruiting already validated people from other reputable trackers is always least risky to trackers.
Bookmarks