Wooten chose option two, filed his motion with this court, sent in his consent form and requested the ap- pointment of counsel. This sequence of events, though hardly uncommon, raises several issues of first impression in our court concerning amended 1915. As to prisoners, then, the PLRA changes the meaning of in forma pauperis. Lack of financial resources no longer excuses them from paying the full filing fee for an appeal. Again, we agree with the Fifth and Seventh Circuits that it should.
Logic dictates as much.
Whether Wooten would wish to pursue his appeal if we refused to allow him to proceed in forma pauperis, in other words if we sustained the district court's certification, remains to be seen. In the absence of some evident improper motive, the applicant's good faith is established by the presentation of any issue that is not plainly frivolous. Here, Wooten's repeated filing of the same complaint led to the district court's order barring him from filing any new complaints unless he satisfied conditions. Wooten never challenged the injunctive order on appeal nor has he moved to have it modified. He thus had a duty to comply with the order.