Have to agree with Liferbabe. When the limitations were set forth to limit those that did not participate on the forums I could see the point. Now as stated it seems it went in the opposite direction and honestly could not see how policy could change so drastically.
It's a big circle.
Once you establish "participation" requirements, the obvious question becomes,
"What do you mean by 'participation?'"
The DIS initially answered that by saying they wanted the posters to have been members for a while and have made consistent and substantive contributions to the community. And the obvious question became,
"What does 'for a while' mean, and what does 'consistent and substantive contributions' mean?"
So they came up with a formula: 6 months, 50 posts, more or less consistently -- not 48 posts in the last two weeks. And then the question became,
"But I was on vacation, sick, etc. What about me?"
So they adjusted it again to at least 8 mosts in 4 of the previous 6 months...and I don't know what from there.
As you can see, in trying to give reasonable answers to reasonable questions, the criteria became rather tortured. And...there were legitimately folks who had been members for a long time, and had posted some, who were still shut out.
So they came up with the "Pay to Play" idea -- NOT as a revenue source for the DIS, but in an attempt to provide a fair way for newer or less active posters to qualify and use the R/T Board.
Now folks are upset that the DIS is allowing sellers to buy their way in. AND -- not for nothin' -- Pay to Play
eliminates the original objective of the restrictions!
Where it really gets crazy -- and I don't think this issue has been raised yet (at least not publicly) -- is the question of
who has to pay, and
who gets in free. For example, below are listed the joining dates and post counts of the first 10 threads on the R/T board this afternoon, as well as whether they paid or not:
5/2005 - 203 posts - PAID
5/2006 - 247 posts
4/2011 - 13 posts - PAID
2/2003 - 912 posts - PAID
2/2009 - 129 posts - PAID
5/2008 - 216 posts - PAID
2/2006 - 9,953 posts
4/2011 - 17 posts - PAID
3/2008 - 14 posts - PAID
2/2006 - 191 posts - PAID
I'd be willing to bet that someone would look at those numbers and find an inequity somewhere.
But that's what the mods have to deal with once they start down this path. There is no such thing as a perfect solution once you start down the path of restricting access to the R/T board.
No matter what the mods do, somebody is going to be upset -- and in all likelihood, they'll have a good point.
Is it really worth all this? Who knows? We don't even know what the
problem is that they're trying to fix!
For all this hassle for the poor mods, it had better be something REALLY important!
.... just kidding! 
