"I think that premium membership should only be open to those with more than 200 posts (really) AND more than 3 months membership."

Martin, with regard to buckeye's observation, why make the AND stipulation. I note that buckeye has been registered for quite a while as well, since June 2005. Would it be possible to ammend the stipulation to include an OR such as "or to those who have been registered over x time period"? The time period could be along the lines of at least a year. Or make exceptions on a case by case basis. For example buckeye has been a long-time registered user with under 200 posts but recent posts in the last 3 months. He is in. Whereas user X has been registered since 2003 with 5 posts and hasn't made a post since 2003 and only recently made a post to get in on the action. He is out. I don't know what the answer is here. Just tossing out some ideas. There will be no easy or fair way to do it without making somebody mad.

Perhaps this could be the new proposed guideline:

"Premium membership should only be open to those with more than 200 posts AND more than 3 months membership; or to those who have been registered for at least one year. Those who have been registered for over a year with less than 200 posts will be evaluated on a case by case basis."

Or am I missing something else here Martin? Obviously the intent is to keep someone from registering and making 200 bogus posts in a week's time just so they can access premium membership benefits. Also to make it easier as opposed to a case by case basis. On the other hand I think at least a year wait is enough to be prohibitive to someone like this. Am I missing anything else?

As far as interest, I think I could talk DW into it no problem at $12 per year. FWIW. Hope this pans out.