Decrease the posting delay!

[compfreak847]

This is a pet peeve of mine that I've been meaning to suggest for a while. Decrease the delay between posts! Currently it's a minute; something like 20 or 30 seconds would be much better. In a minute I can type a paragraph and a half - few threads require that, some only a couple of sentences that I can type in 10 or 15 seconds. It's not uncommon for me to have several posts ready to submit lined up in my firefox tabs simply because I've typed them all in under a minute. I know its there to prevent spammers, but couldn't it be shorter, or have it decrease as your postcount goes up (and thus your likelihood of spamming decreases and it becomes easier to ban)?

 

 

 

Just a thought.

[tripsis]

I can totally relate to you that the flood control is annoying. There were several times where I would answer a PM and then attempt to respond to a thread that I was viewing prior to receiving a PM, and would have to wait 30+ seconds before posting. So I won't deny that flood control sucks.

 

 

 

But at the same time, it does prevent spammers as you said and it helps more than you may think. Earlier today a user was spamming graphic images. As a global moderator, I couldn't ban him but had to wait for a super moderator or admin to come online. Before he was banned, I had to constantly refresh his post history, removing his inappropriate threads as he created them. Had he been able to create threads 2x faster, I might have gone insane.

[compfreak847]

I can totally relate to you that the flood control is annoying. There were several times where I would answer a PM and then attempt to respond to a thread that I was viewing prior to receiving a PM, and would have to wait 30+ seconds before posting. So I won't deny that flood control sucks.

 

 

 

But at the same time, it does prevent spammers as you said and it helps more than you may think. Earlier today a user was spamming graphic images. As a global moderator, I couldn't ban him but had to wait for a super moderator or admin to come online. Before he was banned, I had to constantly refresh his post history, removing his inappropriate threads as he created them. Had he been able to create threads 2x faster, I might have gone insane.

 

Is there any way we could hinge it on post count? I know it's discrimination etc. etc. blah blah, but isn't someone with 3k+ post count less likely to spam inappropriate images then someone who's joined yesterday with a post count of 3?

[tripsis]

Is there any way we could hinge it on post count? I know it's discrimination etc. etc. blah blah, but isn't someone with 3k+ post count less likely to spam inappropriate images then someone who's joined yesterday with a post count of 3?

 

If it is possible, I would be all for it.

[dsavi]

It will be made possible with the release of phpBB 3.2 "Ascraeus", where postcount will be able to trigger events, such as in this case adding the user to a group where the flood limit is lower. But for now, it's useful.

 

 

 

I say that as a constant user of forum games.

[compfreak847]

It will be made possible with the release of phpBB 3.2 "Ascraeus", where postcount will be able to trigger events, such as in this case adding the user to a group where the flood rate is lower. But for now, it's useful.

 

 

 

I say that as a constant user of forum games.

 

Ehh, one can only hope. I have a feeling it'll be a while before it comes out and tip.it adopts it, and even longer (or never) before features like this get implemented. Ah well, one can't hope for too much from an ad\donation supported fansite (not that I don't think you guys do a great job =D> )

[Jimmyw3000]

We could lower it to 30seconds in some forums, such as blogscape and forum games...maybe even the libraries and galleries (altho i;m not sure about the latter ones. havent been there much)

[dsavi]

It will be made possible with the release of phpBB 3.2 "Ascraeus", where postcount will be able to trigger events, such as in this case adding the user to a group where the flood rate is lower. But for now, it's useful.

 

 

 

I say that as a constant user of forum games.

 

Ehh, one can only hope. I have a feeling it'll be a while before it comes out and tip.it adopts it, and even longer (or never) before features like this get implemented. Ah well, one can't hope for too much from an ad\donation supported fansite (not that I don't think you guys do a great job =D> )

 

Could be a year or more before 3.2 is released, but when it comes out I'm quite sure that we'll upgrade after the first or second bugfix. (Only a guess)

We could lower it to 30seconds in some forums, such as blogscape and forum games...maybe even the libraries and galleries (altho i;m not sure about the latter ones. havent been there much)

Unfortunately, the flood limit is only changeable on a global basis and absolutely on a forum basis. That means that you can turn it off completely for one forum, but where the flood limit is on it's all the same.

[compfreak847]

We could lower it to 30seconds in some forums, such as blogscape and forum games...maybe even the libraries and galleries (altho i;m not sure about the latter ones. havent been there much)

 

Wouldn't really be helpful to me, I mostly post in H&A, Rants, Tech\Computers, General Discussion, General Guides. A minute is enough for a 2 paragraph, 15 sentence essay - something that virtually no thread needs for a response, especially some H&A threads that can be answered with 2 sentences in 10 seconds.

[DarkDude]

A minute should be plenty of time to read a thread along with the replies before thinking of what to write then writing it. Only you'd be stopped by it is if the thread was new or you were reading multiple topics at once. A minute is fine, I only remember being stopped by it a handful of times in the 4 and a half years I've been a member here.

 

 

 

Although something perhaps like 2 posts in 2 minutes (instead of 1 in 1) or something equivalent would mean people would be able to post quickly while not changing the amount of posts a user can make in a time period and thus is as effective against spamming as the current delay is. Although I doubt it'd be possible to do.

[Hawks]

I often have multiple threads open in addition to a PM and when I try to reply to one, then the next, and so on, the flood limit does bother me a lot. Hopefully when the next one comes out we'll switch... Until then I'm thinking there's not much we can do.

[compfreak847]

A minute should be plenty of time to read a thread along with the replies before thinking of what to write then writing it. Only you'd be stopped by it is if the thread was new or you were reading multiple topics at once. A minute is fine, I only remember being stopped by it a handful of times in the 4 and a half years I've been a member here.

 

 

 

Although something perhaps like 2 posts in 2 minutes (instead of 1 in 1) or something equivalent would mean people would be able to post quickly while not changing the amount of posts a user can make in a time period and thus is as effective against spamming as the current delay is. Although I doubt it'd be possible to do.

 

Not really. Most H&A threads are something I can skim over and reply (productively and accurately) with a few sentences in under 20 seconds.

[Jimmyw3000]

And in forum games, it's just typing a number/a few words, without reading the entire thread; usually just the previous poster's post.

[jemathonical]

What's all this with having more than one forum tab running? Write up a post, post it. Click your way to your next reply, post etc.

 

I must be all behind with my forum lurking that I only have one Tipit window going.

 

I really don't see the need to change it. It does help with spammers, and if we make it shorter those who do spam will go crazy and we will all moan about how either there should be more mods or make posting limit 1 minute.

 

The latter being the smartest and easiest way to deal with things.

[Rainy_Day]

"Patience is a virtue". I feel a minute is not too long. It provides you with plenty of time to read through a thread, and then replt to it. I don't understand why there is a huge rush to post manicly on numerous threads. It also aids us when a user starts posting scamming/advertising/spam topics throughout, as we are given enough time to remove them, and prepare for others. I always managed to post without the flood control effecting me. :?

[tripsis]

I always managed to post without the flood control effecting me. :?

 

Because flood control is turned off for moderators :P

 

 

 

When I retired from being an admin, I ran into so many flood control problems, it drove me insane. Being a moderator/admin spoils us in that sense :lol:

 

 

 

For me, PMs were probably the biggest source of trouble. If I got multiple PMs, I would usually finish one in 30 seconds or less, move onto the next, and have to sit and wait for flood control to wear off.

 

 

 

EDIT: Just to clarify, my position on this is still "no," unless/until we can decrease the flood control as post count increases.

[Kaphias]

But at the same time, it does prevent spammers as you said and it helps more than you may think. Earlier today a user was spamming graphic images. As a global moderator, I couldn't ban him but had to wait for a super moderator or admin to come online. Before he was banned, I had to constantly refresh his post history, removing his inappropriate threads as he created them. Had he been able to create threads 2x faster, I might have gone insane.

 

This is the biggest reason that I'd have to say no. My time on the moderating team helped me realize that just like tripsis said, the one minute delay helps immensely when you have a user constantly posting new threads that need removing.

 

 

 

I'd love to have it increased for those with higher post counts though. :)

[Georgelemmons]

If there's a stepped system as post count increases, that would be awsome.

 

 

 

I hope some admins seriously consider this :

[Rainy_Day]

I always managed to post without the flood control effecting me. :?

 

Because flood control is turned off for moderators :P

 

 

 

 

I meant for when I wasn't a moderator. :?

[compfreak847]

"Patience is a virtue". I feel a minute is not too long. It provides you with plenty of time to read through a thread, and then replt to it. I don't understand why there is a huge rush to post manicly on numerous threads. It also aids us when a user starts posting scamming/advertising/spam topics throughout, as we are given enough time to remove them, and prepare for others. I always managed to post without the flood control effecting me. :?

 

Let's give an example. http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=779648. It took me approx. 3 seconds to click on the link, read the post, and click on the 'reply' button. It takes me about 5 seconds to type "No, it just drains slower in the regular zones" and hit post. In under 10 seconds, I have accurately read and responded to a H&A thread, completely answering the posters question.

 

 

 

 

What's all this with having more than one forum tab running? Write up a post, post it. Click your way to your next reply, post etc.

 

I must be all behind with my forum lurking that I only have one Tipit window going.

 

I really don't see the need to change it. It does help with spammers, and if we make it shorter those who do spam will go crazy and we will all moan about how either there should be more mods or make posting limit 1 minute.

 

The latter being the smartest and easiest way to deal with things.

 

At any given time I have several dozen tabs open, with at least 15 dedicated to tip.it (22 open to tip.it pages as I speak). It's called multitasking, and I can accurately and helpfully respond to a thread in under 10 seconds, as illustrated above. Unfortunately, for the 10 seconds I spend replying, I spend 50 seconds clicking 'submit' and waiting for the timer to run off. If I click too fast, it dumps me to the thread page without submitting my reply without informing me.

[jemathonical]

 

 

What's all this with having more than one forum tab running? Write up a post, post it. Click your way to your next reply, post etc.

 

I must be all behind with my forum lurking that I only have one Tipit window going.

 

I really don't see the need to change it. It does help with spammers, and if we make it shorter those who do spam will go crazy and we will all moan about how either there should be more mods or make posting limit 1 minute.

 

The latter being the smartest and easiest way to deal with things.

 

At any given time I have several dozen tabs open, with at least 15 dedicated to tip.it (22 open to tip.it pages as I speak). It's called multitasking, and I can accurately and helpfully respond to a thread in under 10 seconds, as illustrated above. Unfortunately, for the 10 seconds I spend replying, I spend 50 seconds clicking 'submit' and waiting for the timer to run off. If I click too fast, it dumps me to the thread page without submitting my reply without informing me.

 

 

 

If you feel the need to have dozens of tabs open, then the flood control is working perfectly. Yeh you can type fast and multitask Yo but the reason you are getting the flood warning is because you have 15 topics open. And unless you are typing out really decent replies after reading through the whole topic then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

 

 

Bla bla bla, all in all, you are probably only one a few that has 15 tabs open, that is your choice and of course you won't be able to post all 15 in the space of a minute.

[compfreak847]

 

 

What's all this with having more than one forum tab running? Write up a post, post it. Click your way to your next reply, post etc.

 

I must be all behind with my forum lurking that I only have one Tipit window going.

 

I really don't see the need to change it. It does help with spammers, and if we make it shorter those who do spam will go crazy and we will all moan about how either there should be more mods or make posting limit 1 minute.

 

The latter being the smartest and easiest way to deal with things.

 

At any given time I have several dozen tabs open, with at least 15 dedicated to tip.it (22 open to tip.it pages as I speak). It's called multitasking, and I can accurately and helpfully respond to a thread in under 10 seconds, as illustrated above. Unfortunately, for the 10 seconds I spend replying, I spend 50 seconds clicking 'submit' and waiting for the timer to run off. If I click too fast, it dumps me to the thread page without submitting my reply without informing me.

 

 

 

If you feel the need to have dozens of tabs open, then the flood control is working perfectly. Yeh you can type fast and multitask Yo but the reason you are getting the flood warning is because you have 15 topics open. And unless you are typing out really decent replies after reading through the whole topic then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

 

 

Bla bla bla, all in all, you are probably only one a few that has 15 tabs open, that is your choice and of course you won't be able to post all 15 in the space of a minute.

 

What? 15 tabs is just so I can read more pages without waiting for them to load. It has nothing to do with how many posts (although my posting is very slightly faster because of the lack of internet loading delay) I'm posting. I'm getting the flood warning because I can read and respond to a post in 15 seconds - accurately and helpfully.

[das1330]

I think reducing the flood control slightly to something like 15 or 30 seconds would be a good idea. While it has been a long time since I have had to put up with the flood control, I distinctly remember being annoyed by constantly having to wait to make multiple posts. Beside that, from my experience spammers that would actually need flood controls to keep at bay are sufficiently rare that it wouldn't be too big a burden on the moderating staff to reduce the delay.

[InkofDeath]

Somewhere in the far reaches of this forum is a few threads about flood control. Though I went back to 2007, and I'm assuming the hardy discussion that around 6-8 of us had was probably deleted...I went back to page 8, but couldn't find it...hopefully someone remembers the topic. Oh wait! The thread I'm talking about is the 5 > 15 thread, where I was talking about the speed it takes to write & read a thread, and thus the 5 minutes is too short to show accurate activity...etc. Servers use for my reasoning below.

 

 

 

Regardless, many of you guys are thinking far too narrow.

 

 

 

This is the general response to a 'no, let's not do this' for decreasing the delay:

 

 

 

"It takes a good while to read through the thread, and then write up a reply to the thread."

 

 

 

This is entirely wrong for several reasons:

 

 

 

1. Help & Advice forum.

 

 

 

All questions are usually one liners, and are very simple answered questions, answered from memory. Not by writing a huge detailed post, or anything. I could probably answer 7/10 threads in the H&A forum in under 10 seconds, without even thinking.

 

 

 

Why is this bad?

 

 

 

For one it stops people from helping one and another, it's a road block, it's an invisible wall in a game, and it's annoying to not be able to answer a question, even though the thread is so short in text.

 

 

 

2. Replying In A thread Multiple times

 

 

 

So the first time, it takes me about half an hour to read through a 5-8 page thread? Ok, good, I write a post up, and someone eventually posts back. Ok, so I'll have to wait till they write a post and then submit it, then I'll have to counter or discuss their argument/discussion. It sounds reasonable to have a 1 minute, or higher timer in this situation.

 

 

 

However it's not ever like this. I have around 30 threads at the least I am always checking. I have read every post, or posted a considerable amount in the thread. So while I don't need to take half an hour to read posts, it only takes me a few seconds to read and then a few more to reply.

 

 

 

Oh, and I'm not even talking about threads like the SSBB thread, the WoW thread, or any thread where it is one or two liner posts, but have significance.

 

 

 

So now I have to wait a minute for say 20 of those 30+ threads...but I don't need to wait a minute to respond to each thread, I only need 20 seconds?

 

 

 

So there's 20 minutes in waiting, which is more than posting. Great forum experience for me! Especially if I needed to PM someone or ask them a question about when they'll be online tonight for a game, or if they have this game, or if they can trade me this in RS, or continue on this discussion from some thread...etc.

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

A minute isn't fair to us users, and I am constantly hit with 'Please Wait' notices. It's annoying and degrades the forum experience for me. Instead of feeling immersed in a discussion, I get reminded, oh this is just a forum...It's not very fulfilling.

 

 

 

Disallow mods & admins to avoid flood control for a week, and we'd most likely see a change in the flood control.

[tripsis]

Somewhere in the far reaches of this forum is a few threads about flood control. Though I went back to 2007, and I'm assuming the hardy discussion that around 6-8 of us had was probably deleted...I went back to page 8, but couldn't find it...hopefully someone remembers the topic. Oh wait! The thread I'm talking about is the 5 > 15 thread, where I was talking about the speed it takes to write & read a thread, and thus the 5 minutes is too short to show accurate activity...etc. Servers use for my reasoning below.

 

I remember that thread all too well :lol:

 

 

 

Disallow mods & admins to avoid flood control for a week, and we'd most likely see a change in the flood control.

 

I hope that's not true. It may be, but I really hope not :P Having gone from an admin to a regular user and then to a moderator in a few months, I think I've seen both sides of the argument pretty well. I was on staff for a few years and was pretty spoiled by not being affected by flood control, since it's turned off for moderators. When I left staff, man I was hit HARD. Part of me almost forgot flood control existed and it shocked me to see how many times I was hit with that flood control message. It sucked and I totally feel your pain.

 

 

 

But then you have to consider the moderator side too. Imagine you're a global moderator. You cannot ban users but you can moderate every forum. Suddenly a big time porn spammer comes online and starts creating threads to post porn the second the flood control is lifted (one thread every minute). There are no super moderators or admins online to ban the guy, so you're stuck removing each and every thread that is created, to get it out of public view. At the same time, you have to close every report that is sent in, because even though you're stalking the guy's post history and removing threads as soon as they are created, people keep reporting them so you have to close each report too (which isn't necessarily a bad thing and we do appreciate reports, but closing a ton of reports does add up when they're coming in once every minute). Sometimes these spammers can carry on for over 30 minutes without getting bored and giving up. So imagine sitting on Tip.it for 30 minutes, stalking a spammer's post history, removing each thread and closing each report because a super moderator or admin isn't online to ban them. No it doesn't happen every day and maybe not every week. But when it does happen, it's tedious, boring and frustrating and certainly no fun to take care of.

 

 

 

I can totally sympathize with your frustration, I really can. But we really do need a relatively high flood control limit for the sake of moderators' sanity. Maybe I could see lowering it to 45 seconds or so if that would be helpful, but any lower and it could be problematic for moderators.