Now, I understand this feature is to prevent spamming, and it is quite useful, however this really annoys me in the Forum Games forum. This is because in Forum Games, most of the threads are "Count to XXX", so I post in them, and as soon as I open another "Count to XXX", this message pops up for a minute. It gets extremely annoying at times. :x

 

 

 

So, my suggestion is to remove this rule in the Forum Games forum so it wouldn't be so hindering.

 

 

 

Hope my suggestion helps! :)

Hi. :)

 

 

 

There is a similar topic here, which explains it a bit.

 

 

 

In short, we can't just remove the posting delay in just one forum, and the arguments for keeping it far outweigh the arguments of removing it.

 

 

 

Hope that answers your question. :)

 

 

 

P.S. Also, the mods don't want you to reach 500. :twisted:

Hi. :)

 

 

 

There is a similar topic here, which explains it a bit.

 

 

 

In short, we can't just remove the posting delay in just one forum, and the arguments for keeping it far outweigh the arguments of removing it.

 

 

 

Hope that answers your question. :)

 

 

 

P.S. Also, the mods don't want you to reach 500. :twisted:

 

 

 

You definitely can, but I understand why you don't want to.

^ Spam users. It limits the damage they can do. (Although I have come upon a workaround which hasn't been implemented.)

^ Spam users. It limits the damage they can do. (Although I have come upon a workaround which hasn't been implemented.)

 

I don't understand that, would you add every forum member to that usergroup?

No, only the moderators. And actually, you wouldn't even need to do that, I found that setting the group's (In this case, the moderator group) "Can post without moderator approval" setting to "Never" (As opposed to "no") does the trick, no need to get personal. :P

No, only the moderators. And actually, you wouldn't even need to do that, I found that setting the group's (In this case, the moderator group) "Can post without moderator approval" setting to "Never" (As opposed to "no") does the trick, no need to get personal. :P

 

But what would the advantage of this be?

Moderators with the required permissions could "Mute" users without actually banning them by adding them to a group. This way if they found a spambot they could "mute" it and report the spambot to an admin, who would ban it, instead of desperately searching for an admin/supermod while one spam post is posted per minute.

 

I have mute in quotes because it's not actually muting it. It just makes so that their posts require moderator approval before they can be publicly viewable.

Moderators with the required permissions could "Mute" users without actually banning them by adding them to a group. This way if they found a spambot they could "mute" it and report the spambot to an admin, who would ban it, instead of desperately searching for an admin/supermod while one spam post is posted per minute.

 

I have mute in quotes because it's not actually muting it. It just makes so that their posts require moderator approval before they can be publicly viewable.

 

 

 

However you need to be a super mod to modify user's groups, and if you are a super mod, you can ban anyway.

 

 

 

EDIT: Unless the mods were all going to be group leaders? I assume it would work then.

 

 

 

EDIT 2: After testing on my forum, I don't have an option to add users to groups without being a super mod, even if I am a group leader.

No. You see, the thing about phpBB permissions is that any person can have any single permission. That means that a normal user could, if the Administrators so pleased, have access to create forums but no other higher permissions, or have all of them, or only be an Administrator but not a moderator, or any other insane combination of permissions. A user must not be an SMOD to be a group leader, all they need is the correct "permission mask".

No. You see, the thing about phpBB permissions is that any person can have any single permission. That means that a normal user could, if the Administrators so pleased, have access to create forums but no other higher permissions, or have all of them, or only be an Administrator but not a moderator, or any other insane combination of permissions. A user must not be an SMOD to be a group leader, all they need is the correct "permission mask".

 

 

 

I realize that, I guess my question now is: If I have a regular user who is a group leader, how does he go about adding someone to that group? I don't have an acp, mcp or administrate user option.

UCP->Usergroups->Manage Groups->Manage Users

 

Looks like this if you are a group leader:

 

[hide=][/hide]

UCP->Usergroups->Manage Groups->Manage Users

 

Looks like this if you are a group leader:

 

[hide=][/hide]

 

Ahh ok, thanks. However I don't appear to be able to do it, it says "you are not allowed to manage groups". I assume there is an option in the acp somewhere?

 

 

 

EDIT: I got it, I had "founder manage only" turned on.

 

 

 

This is actually a really great idea, I wonder why tif hasn't done it?

and the arguments for keeping it far outweigh the arguments of removing it.

 

Not really. It's more or less inaccurate methods in determining which arguments/ideas are better suited for the overall change that could potentially happen. The arguments on either side are pretty much equal to each other, yet technical limitations and lack of the general user population knowing about that thread from almost two months ago is what the problem is in that thread. As well, it still stands to reason that moderators/admins should go a week without the flood control and see how lovely it is, as it would give a better motivation or incentive to the naysayers (moderators/staff) to actually support the idea or the solution that has been posted repeatedly that could lower the flood control without much harm.

 

 

 

Actually excluding the low amount of users that know or care to post in here, technical limitations is generally the only reason why a good portion of all suggestions never get implemented, even if they'd benefit the majority. Which is quite annoying and frustrating anyways.

UCP->Usergroups->Manage Groups->Manage Users

 

Looks like this if you are a group leader:

 

[hide=][/hide]

 

 

 

 

 

You used my forum as an example :roll:

Actually, I used my stable installation of phpBB hosted on my own machine.

Can we maybe remove this cap for forums where you dont get post count for posts?

Can we maybe remove this cap for forums where you dont get post count for posts?

 

Totally removing it, it would be spammed a lot.

 

 

 

Though lowering it in such forums may not be a bad idea.

Can we maybe remove this cap for forums where you dont get post count for posts?

 

Totally removing it, it would be spammed a lot.

 

 

 

Though lowering it in such forums may not be a bad idea.

 

There is still the question of advertisers - I'm sure they don't care about post count and they could take advantage of the lower posting delay.

It's not disabled for staff as a whole, just disabled if you mod the forum.

 

 

 

While the feature can be annoying - It's in place to prevent serious abuse and I doubt it will ever be lifted.

In my opinion (which probably doesn't matter) it's somewhat annoying, I mostly browse off topic, and post occsioinally, and at times I'll have a few tabs open just waiting to submit posts. I think that there should be some restrictions however.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure this has been suggested, but maybe a post count related time limit if that's doable. For example, 750+ posts and you have no limit, etc.

In my opinion (which probably doesn't matter) it's somewhat annoying, I mostly browse off topic, and post occsioinally, and at times I'll have a few tabs open just waiting to submit posts. I think that there should be some restrictions however.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure this has been suggested, but maybe a post count related time limit if that's doable. For example, 750+ posts and you have no limit, etc.

 

 

 

I can't think of anything worth saying that can't wait, especially if you can type it in quickly enough to have the post time limit affect you.

Some places it is reasonable. But for places that posts dont count such as blogs/Forum games, there is no need for waiting to post.

Some places it is reasonable. But for places that posts dont count such as blogs/Forum games, there is no need for waiting to post.

 

What if a spammer comes? I'm sure they don't care about posting in a forum that gives no post count.

I hope noone takes offense to this but seriously why do we need a numerous amount of Mods if they dont do much at all? There's probably 5 locks a DAY. If someone spams, woop-de-doo. BAN THEM.

 

 

 

I dont like the length of time it takes to post things because most of the time I'm giving advice in H&A, and posting in VG&C.

 

Even lowering it by 15 seconds or 10 seconds would do dramatically and wont affect anything badly.