If you honestly take a step back and assess that process of limiting requests to Gold-only members, I think you'll perceive the value to the site (as a whole). You'll be quite amazed at how fast you'll gain likes and then appreciably trade those for Gold-status; it's simply a process of contributor-ship and being a member of the site. The rationale is explained by the Mods and stands as sound judgement. The site is definitely dynamic and remains a "work-in -progress" (as any robust and longevity-seeking site should) and welcomes input from its members [by all means - voice concern within the appropriate thread; usually the rules section] and anticipate some form of rebuttal (it's a healthy banter that moves the community forward) . . .
Thank you for a reasoned and logical response. My original point was simply, the idea of allowing non-paying members, but not allowing them to fully participate, especially considering dinobytes' earlier comment about the difference between someone who shares a lot vs paying but not sharing, seems short-sighted. But it's not my site. I didn't see anything about trading likes for Gold status and if that's the case, it makes a lot more sense to me, not that I have any interest in that. Becoming a member of a club I detest (not the actual members, just the club - I HATE clubs!) would be silly. I'll post as many of my, close to 1000, tutorials as I feel appropriate to give back and go away.
Understood . . . perhaps replace the word "Club" with an understanding of effort to organize the chaos [everything is a process after-all, right?). Stay awhile and take a look around . . . so much to see and [better] if one can actually implement and learn from same. It's not to say there isn't associated noise (some tutorials simply suck) . . . but there's effort to delineate that, as well. Any material shared by you would be well-received by any - - - thanks in advance! Sounds stupid and obvious - but do take a look in the rules section and various like areas. Most answers will be found there.
Chicken and egg question: Do reasonable people choose Nikons (I've shot with Nikons for a VERY long time!) or does shooting with a Nikon make one reasonable?
Pattoo....sorry if the responses were not quite what i perceived you had hoped for. As Nikon said, the steps to achieving GOLD are pretty simple, for someone who has material to share. If not, admin has provided a way to establish GOLD by purchasing. This also allows material to be purchased and shared here. We look forward to the tutorials you do feel like sharing, and hope that you'll find a comfort zone, in a club you won't have to hate. At any rate, welcome.....
LOL - I still shoot with some old stuff as well. Really hoping for the day when ANY brand makes a device that can capture full dynamic range (or close enough) to warrant an equitable upgrade. But from the beginning - it's the body that feels "best" in "my" hands . . . kinda like a Strat vs. Gibson thing . . .
It's the end of the road for me. Even my D850, which does a great job with dynamic range, still has trouble with a waterfall, deep in the woods, with dappled light (last outing at Oshiraji taki, Tochigi, Japan), but it'll be the last camera I ever own. I have no use for MILCs and Nikon seems to be over DSLRs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
