Requested feature overview description
All users currently registered and not banned on e621, with the exception of the administrators, will be required to submit a minimum of three posts a month. In this case, a "month" means exactly 30 days after a registered user has opened their e621 account. Users who do not submit a minimum of three posts in a month will receive a warning, and will be banned the third month of not posting the minimum number of posts. There will be a "Posts Left" addition on account pages to reflect this change.

Why would it be useful?
e621 is a community dedicated to archiving "the best/strangest/most excellent animal/anthro-related artwork, regardless of content, for all those who wish to view it". All users should be expected to contribute to e621 by seeking out and posting a minimum of three works that meet the minimum quality standards and are not on the DNP list.

If implemented properly, this rule would not only increase the number of submissions on this website but will encourage users to post more artwork of artists who are not DNP but whose works are rarely posted on this website.

What part(s) of the site page(s) are affected
The User Accounts.

Absolutely not. Contribution is voluntary and not a requirement for an account.

Is this communism?

this is terrible idea. it would lead to people uploading complete trash just to fill the requirement.

What?

No

Inb4 over half the site gets banned, most posts are duplicates, and there's so many tagme's that everybody gives up on fixing them...

EDIT: and people uploading comics 3 pages at a time and waiting a month between uploads

Uh how about no?

And what use does all the art has when nobody is there to look at it?

Reverse the suggestion, make it so that people can post maximum three post a month so that they would take their time with the upload instead of focusing on them upload numbers.

Mairo said:
Reverse the suggestion, make it so that people can post maximum three post a month so that they would take their time with the upload instead of focusing on them upload numbers.

But then how will people know that I'm coooool?

Also, OP. Godawful idea. Sorry, but it is. Mandatory uploading is just... the worst of ideas. There's no faster way to kill your community.

Mairo said:
Reverse the suggestion, make it so that people can post maximum three post a month so that they would take their time with the upload instead of focusing on them upload numbers.

Maybe combine that with the current method, so that you have an upload limit of three per month, but it goes down one every four deletions and up one every ten approvals. After four months you can get 4 posts per month, if you get only approvals.

realandyisepic said:
All users currently registered and not banned on e621, with the exception of the administrators, will be required to submit a minimum of three posts a month.

Mairo said:
Reverse the suggestion, make it so that people can post maximum three post a month so that they would take their time with the upload instead of focusing on them upload numbers.

These are both not good ideas.

Mairo said:
Reverse the suggestion, make it so that people can post maximum three post a month so that they would take their time with the upload instead of focusing on them upload numbers.

Ironically this would have the same consequence for comics

CrocoGator said:
EDIT: and people uploading comics 3 pages at a time and waiting a month between uploads

Banning based on post count is also likely to remove artists who only post their own work.

Instead of negative reinforcement, why not try something that actually benefits the average user for contributions?
Like do 500-1000 tag edits in a month and get a temp bonus of being able to search an extra term. Or something.

One of the worst ideas I've seen yet

Better idea: change the system so that submissions, at bare minimum, are posted with the minimum amount of tags needed, and gives an error until tag amount is increased. This encourages people to actually try with tags, and benefits the archiving nature of the site by discouraging lazy posting of posts with nothing but "tagme" and the artist's name and makes finding posts a little easier and less difficult due to lack of tags.

Also doesn't force people to need to post things.

Regarding OP, the only thing I want to add to what has already been said is :

We really don't need to be uploading more. We're already uploading 966 posts PER DAY and it looks like this number will continue to rise.

Ijerk said:
Like do 500-1000 tag edits in a month and get a temp bonus of being able to search an extra term. Or something.

If we can figure out a way to ensure that those tag edits aren't spam (nonsense tags, or valid tags applied to wrong posts), this seems like it might be worth a try. Searching an extra term is a quite appropriate reward IMO since really complicated searches mainly help with tagging.

Depending on how you count 'tag edits', this idea could also be used to incentivize people to tag more than the minimum when initially uploading a post.

savageorange said:
If we can figure out a way to ensure that those tag edits aren't spam (nonsense tags, or valid tags applied to wrong posts), this seems like it might be worth a try. Searching an extra term is a quite appropriate reward IMO since really complicated searches mainly help with tagging.

Depending on how you count 'tag edits', this idea could also be used to incentivize people to tag more than the minimum when initially uploading a post.

Well, people can only do 150 edits in an hour so there's that to keep too many nonsense tags at once and if we kept it to only people who don't have negatives it'd discourage nonsense tags further (it'd also mean I wouldn't be able to take advantage of the feature but, c'est la vie). As long as the users who curate tags and report tagging abuse keep doing what their doing we shouldn't have much problem.

Too many pics get uploaded everyday as it is. About 966 per day. It's an ocean of fucking porn! With this proposal we would be drowning in it.

Suggestion should be called "how to kill site 101".
Going to mark this one as denied as nimmy already said no.