Should the "Hook Up" Section be Members Only

I'm ranting, I know. I'd just hate to see this great site that I've really come to love turn into some exclusive, paranoid plastic yacht club.

Dont be a snob, there is some with fiberglass boats as well. 

I agree with the sentiment but 10 posts is hardly exclusive.

I disagree on the MO fishing reports. Much useful info can be gleaned from them, more than from the public reports.

I like polepole's idea with the front page article for guests and what not. 

Fishing, and fisherman, can already be very exclusive not wanting to reveal spots and see them overrun and such, Id hate to see that become even more so.  And as a noob, sometimes posting hookups is a good way to try and meet some members.

Make it members only with a minimum of 15631 posts

What made me happy about discovering and joining this site was the open and inclusive nature of its members. You don't find that very often. I've learned tons from you guys and for that I'm very thankful.

I got really excited when I hit 10 posts so I could see the coveted "members only fishing report", but honestly, there's not really anything all that precious posted on it. Nothing one couldn't find from any number of fishing boards.

Access to the hook up boards, for me is useful because I want to meet people on here, become friends and fish together, not because I want to go steal shit.  Now, if that's gonna change to 250 posts and you have to have been a member for a certain amount of time, I won't be able to do that.
It sucks that some crabs were stolen, in a perfect world, nothing bad would ever happen. Clearly, this info was obtained from sime bad guy, scouring the hook ups. NotThe fact that we're smack in the middle of crabbing season with pots floating around in historical crabbing areas unattended.

But what do I know. I'm just some newb that needs my hand held or I might fall out of my boat and sue you.

Maybe you should have to have 1,000 posts and be a member for 10 years before you can see hook ups. Maybe it should only be invite like the moose lodge or something. Or only open to the sons and daughters of Jim Sammons and Drew Gregory. Or how about a spelling and grammar test to join?

I'm ranting, I know. I'd just hate to see this great site that I've really come to love turn into some exclusive, paranoid plastic yacht club.

The issue isn't about being exclusive.  I think I said this before in a post on this thread, but it's worth bringing up again.  What does a Hook Up section offer to a non-registered person?  They can't post on the thread and they can't contact anyone on the hookup via PM or email (unless that person chose to have their email publically visible in their profile).

Regarding members only sections, some things are for sharing with this community.  The only reason I can think of for sharing some stuff with the public is to allow the public to "see what we got" in case they are interested in joining.  But to be real, there are A LOT of non-members that visit this site.  While we may have 3000-ish registered members, we get over 200K unique visitors per year.  They are here to gather info, right?  Not all info needs to be shared ...

Regarding your comment "But what do I know. I'm just some newb that needs my hand held or I might fall out of my boat and sue you.", there is a subtle point here that is worth discussing.  I think too many people automatically assume a newb here is inexperienced.  While many may be, we should not assume that ALL are.  There are just too many kayak anglers out there to believe that only the experienced ones are in our community.

-Allen

Fifth and last what would Mooch say! From what I read he would say leave it public. As he liked to help people.

I need to get something off my chest here.  To me, using "what would Mooch say" in a discussion like this doesn't do his memory justice.  I don't think you (or I) can say with any certainty what he would say.

-Allen

I think we all are inclined to start as lurkers....it's intimidating to come out to a big forum like this and post something for everyone to see and judge. I think having a 10 post min. Will help people move slowly out and participate and see that there is a safe place for addicts just like them.

If you want to hook up, you gotta put up, then come out of the closet.

p.s I'm digging the retro 80s jacket. Totally down to get an ncka version. Lol.

As far a getting newbies on the salt, formal or informal mentoring is probably better than an open hookup. I know many of us have done this in the past. That way, you can make sure that they have the minimum skills and equipment before the first outing. If each veteran mentored one newbie a year, there would be less mishaps and skill development would accelerated. Not saying that we should not have a hookup section, I am suggesting that we add a mentoring section to the "introductions" section. Then vets could post up to volunteer to be a mentor. It really is quite rewarding to take a newb out and get them on fish. Alien took me and my son out as well as Marmite on our first salt water trip and it was really special.

If we were to have both a members and non members section, I would post hook ups like Del Valle in the open section and when I wanted a more exclusive hookup like a private spot or difficult area, I would post in members only and post "salt hookup in Monterey co. pm for details". This is the only way I see to have it all.
In fact, I really don't care how you make it, this will be the way I post hookups from now on.
I only hope that we don't become one of those forums that require too much BS to become a member.
There is a reason we are what we are

See Ya Soon,
Eric / Yakhopper

How about requiring exactly two posts to see the hookups and classified sections. One in introductions and one in "post your real name and picture"?

Then we know who to look for and something about them. This forum has never been about anonymity.

I still haven't voted and probably won't. I don't see this affecting my life one way or the other, but I've liked the discussion this thread has generated.

For the record, I agree, 10 posts is hardly exclusive. I was reacting more to talk of 250+ posts or by invitation only.

I know I'm new to this site and my opinion doesn't matter much.
Really, all I want from this site is to make some friends and fish. If the rules change mid-game, it just makes it a little harder.
Whatever decision is made, I'll roll with it and continue to have fun.

Cheers
Russell.

After reading through this thread, it seems to me the most effective measure to avoid crab thievery as a result of the thieves reading the Hookup board would be not to post a Hookup when one chooses to go crabbing and keep it to PMs to people you know, or to follow Yakhopper's suggestion of posting a hook-up and being vague on the location. 

Several folks already mentioned how post counts are hardly a qualifier for someone’s integrity, and I agree.  It’s very easy for someone to put in a little time to post things here and there across the site to increase their post count.  Would a 10- or 20-post count deter some would-be thieves?  Probably some, yes.  But it certainly wouldn’t be 100 percent effective.  All the potential thief would have to do is make some posts until they hit the “quota,” then they could sit back and enjoy their free access for the rest of the season.  And if these crab thieves are putting in the effort not only to browse through the NCKA Hookups board waiting for crab hookups to be posted, but also to arrive at the spot, wait for the kayakers to disappear from sight, then go out and rob their pots, who says they wouldn’t have the patience to post up a dozen random posts about kayak paddles or Fisheries News, and mix in a few "WTG" posts on reports so they can achieve their “season pass” of access to the Hookups board?

The post-count thing is hardly a bump in the road for someone with just a little bit of determination.  If the required post-count is bumped up to 100 or 200 posts, I could see divisions forming among members who have the requisite number of posts and those who do not, and it could lead to a significant drop in new membership once the new members see the exclusivity clubs within clubs would impart.  It'd make the site far less inviting.

If we were to have both a members and non members section, I would post hook ups like Del Valle in the open section and when I wanted a more exclusive hookup like a private spot or difficult area, I would post in members only and post "salt hookup in Monterey co. pm for details". This is the only way I see to have it all.
In fact, I really don't care how you make it, this will be the way I post hookups from now on.
I only hope that we don't become one of those forums that require too much BS to become a member.
There is a reason we are what we are

See Ya Soon,
Eric / Yakhopper

I agree on all counts, Yakhopper.  A sound alternative to not posting any hookup at all would be a vague "salt hookup in <> County, PM for details".  That way you'd pretty much know who exactly is showing up and you don't have to worry about blowing up your own trip to would-be crab thieves.  This may not necessarily work in all areas (i.e., if you said you were going crabbing in Southern Humboldt County then someone familiar with the area would know you're headed to Shelter Cove), but I think it'd work in other areas with multiple launch sites.

Hell, it'd be a good idea for freshwater hookups as well.  Don't want your spot blown up?  Just throw a "I'll be on Butt Lake, PM for details" type of Hookup and you won't have to worry about a bunch of powerboaters swarming over your particular spot due to your Hookup post.

How about requiring exactly two posts to see the hookups and classified sections. One in introductions and one in "post your real name and picture"?

Then we know who to look for and something about them. This forum has never been about anonymity.

An easy walk-around of the "Post your real name and picture" part would be to provide a fake name and a picture of some random person you plucked off the Internet.

I agree with being vague about the destination and to use PMs. Vagueness would also apply to the fish reports too. I completely understand about being vague about where one catches territorial fish like ling and rockfish vs salmon which are not. Whichever way one chooses to post reports, I thoroughly enjoy the pictures.

Dangit, clayman. You just gave a how to for the would be thieves to thwart the security measures. Just when I was getting ready to set the tin foil hat down. 

Seriously though, good points.

"Did you hear about those elitists over at NCKA?  They require TEN posts before being able to freely cruise all of their boards!!"

This isn't about being snobs.  Duh...

Ten posts is nothing.  Oh, wait, it's EVERYTHING - you reveal yourself enough in ten posts to show that you're genuine.  If not, then you're not, and I'll bet people would sniff it out immediately.

Don't get me wrong - I'm advocating the ten post requirement.  Just pointing out that it's not a barrier to becoming a member, sharing info...etc.  I do not agree with ideas of 250 posts, minimum time on the board...etc.  Just ten posts - that's it.  That is what will flush out whether you are for real.

Read anyone's first ten posts.  Clayman and others are correct that someone COULD pull the wool and lie about who they are in those posts, but it ain't happenin'.

What's really occurring in those first ten posts, and I am firmly behind this, is that people are discovering not only NCKA but they are discovering a part of themselves.  You don't come on to a board like NCKA and maintain any kind of criminal or even dishonorable intentions in your fist ten posts - it does not happen.  Prove me wrong.

Do you want to know the club?  Do you want to know your clubmates?  Do you want to share part of yourself and reap the rewards of fulfilling one of our most basic yet most important instincts?!  It's called "sharing and caring", and I'm proud to attribute that phrase and sentiment to my clubmate, Frank.

This is real life.  That's what goes on here.  There is no fake member who participates with an ulterior motive.  Prove me wrong.

To protect that with a little, tiny requirement of 10 posts seems like the most basic of moves to me.  Sorry for ranting, but my finger has been firmly on the pulse of this board, this club, this group of people for many years.

Stolen crab or traps have nothing to do with it for me, and I'm not worried about who shows up to a hookup - I've learned how to post and follow through with hookups.  GS started as a hookup.

My only concern is the security of the membership and those who want to join.  If onlookers see that people are genuinely doing the right thing and loving each other here, and they feel compelled to do the same then they should be offered the confidence that no one is looking in without having first identified their own identity and good intentions.  If there are any potential pitfalls for members due to non-members being able to see what is shared then the most basic of safeguards is warranted.

10 posts.  Easy to fulfill, and, according to me, not easy to bullshit your way through just so you can undermine someone else.  Are good intentions required here?  I say the answer is absolutely YES, and 10 posts is the way to show them.

I can't really imagine some weirdo lurker watching NCKA hookups to plan pot raids. More like some dirtball with a Zodiac who happens to be soaking in the same general vicinity and spies a couple floats. Maybe they do though, I dunno.

You'd be amazed at the type of weirdos out there.  I'm not saying that they in fact do this, but I wouldn't put it past them to lurk fishing forums for various info.

How abouy setting it in the program somewhere where if a member say with a 1000 post to his name and posted a hook up, only members with 300 or more post wil see thehookup.  Just an example.
If a member say with only 1 post to his name post a hookup then everyone with 》2 post will see it.
That way the OGs can fish with expirienced crew n hang on to their secret spot and the newbie with 1 post may get lucky and maybe joined by a more seasoned angler.