Flood Control

[Tecmaster]

Frequently on the forums I have a situation where I want to reply to a number of topics in a row. After replying to one topic though I have to stop and wait out the mandatory 45 second flood control period before I can even enter the post writer to begin writing my next post. My suggestion is this: That we reduce the amount of time set on the flood control on the forums to something such as 15 or 30 seconds to make it easier on those who want to reply to a string of topics in a row and can type fairly rapidly. I'm not even sure what practical purpose the flood control accomplishes if someone could explain how it is beneficial to anything that would be nice.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read this,

TecMaster532

[Danqazmlp]

You wouldn't believe how helpful the flood control is when we have an adbot or an account registered to spam.

[Tecmaster]

Would it be possible then to create a way to reduce the flood control for people that have been registered for a certain amount of time, (just a random number 2 years) and have made a certain number of posts in that time to lessen the annoyance to real tifers and still stop addbots and spam accounts, or is this not technologically possible with the current forum software?

[DarkDude]

We have been discussing the possibility of reducing the Flood Control, however it is not possible to restrict it per group thus you'll be unlikely to see it go too low even if it does change.

[obfuscator]

Even removing it based on post count could be disastrous - without going into detail I can think of a few situations where flood control has been a life saver.

[Wisp]

I remember before we switched boards you could open other thread reply windows, just not post. That was way nicer, so you could atleast write up your next reply in between posts, and by the time you finished writing the flood limit timer would have ran out.

[obfuscator]

Technically you can still do that with the quick reply box I think.

[Hawks]

Yeah, all you have to do is have each topic in a different tab/window and you can type replies and such.

 

Since the new forums, I haven't actually had a problem with this. I thought it had been lowered to 30 secs, from the previous 1 minute?

[dsavi]

It's 45 seconds^[1], a big reduction from 60 seconds IMO.

[dsavi]

It's 45 seconds^[1], a big reduction from 60 seconds IMO.

Yes, but you can't even begin typing your post in the regular window (you can however use the fastreply).

 

I'd like to see it reduced to 15 seconds or 30 seconds, because frequently I end up with 30 seconds to wait and it really ticks me off -.-

Allowing you to start creating a post in the full editor would involve changing forum code, which makes the chances of this getting implemented pretty unlikely. The admins have an "Ain't broke, don't fix" policy that I think has served them very well.

[The Observer]

If you are making long, and thoughtful posts (or if you think before you post), then you should easily be able to handle 45 seconds. The main reason behind this is because of adbots or forum spammers.

[tripsis]

If you are making long, and thoughtful posts (or if you think before you post), then you should easily be able to handle 45 seconds. The main reason behind this is because of adbots or forum spammers.

Not all posts require a long thoughtful post. Many in Help & Advice can easily be answered in a sentence or two that can be whipped out in under 45 seconds. That being said, however, I think the flood control time is fine. 45 seconds is pretty generous and the flood control in general is VERY helpful to moderators who do not have the ability to issue a ban but are trying to remove the posts of a spammer.

[DarkDude]

If you are making long, and thoughtful posts (or if you think before you post), then you should easily be able to handle 45 seconds. The main reason behind this is because of adbots or forum spammers.

Not all posts require a long thoughtful post. Many in Help & Advice can easily be answered in a sentence or two that can be whipped out in under 45 seconds. That being said, however, I think the flood control time is fine. 45 seconds is pretty generous and the flood control in general is VERY helpful to moderators who do not have the ability to issue a ban but are trying to remove the posts of a spammer.

 

For cases such as that surely Quick post will suffice, which doesn't require you to wait 45 seconds before you start typing your message.

[tripsis]

If you are making long, and thoughtful posts (or if you think before you post), then you should easily be able to handle 45 seconds. The main reason behind this is because of adbots or forum spammers.

Not all posts require a long thoughtful post. Many in Help & Advice can easily be answered in a sentence or two that can be whipped out in under 45 seconds. That being said, however, I think the flood control time is fine. 45 seconds is pretty generous and the flood control in general is VERY helpful to moderators who do not have the ability to issue a ban but are trying to remove the posts of a spammer.

 

For cases such as that surely Quick post will suffice, which doesn't require you to wait 45 seconds before you start typing your message.

I'd think that Quick Post would suffice in all situations. I understand that sometimes you'll want to quote a post, but even then, you can still get your reply ready in Quick Post, then copy/cut, click "Reply" on the post you want to quote and paste what you wrote earlier.

[Shazarabbit]

You wouldn't believe how helpful the flood control is when we have an adbot or an account registered to spam.

 

Ditto.

 

I agree with many others who have posted though. The time is generous enough. You don't have to reload to post just wait it out, It's not that long.

[Youmu]

I think the flood control timer is fine as of now. However, there is one problem with it.

 

Remember the forum, Forum Games? Having to wait 45 seconds before I can reply to another counting thread kinda ticks me off.

 

Perhaps provide an exception for that forum?

[obfuscator]

I think the flood control timer is fine as of now. However, there is one problem with it.

 

Remember the forum, Forum Games? Having to wait 45 seconds before I can reply to another counting thread kinda ticks me off.

 

Perhaps provide an exception for that forum?

Issue of adbot/spammer still stands there.

[Wachtwoord]

And it keeps the fun in counting games tbh.

[SkillingWoo]

We have been discussing the possibility of reducing the Flood Control, however it is not possible to restrict it per group thus you'll be unlikely to see it go too low even if it does change.

 

It's not impossible. :ph34r:

[Youmu]

And it keeps the fun in counting games tbh.

But it makes it so slow paced. :wall:

 

And dang, didn't know about adbots. In that case, nevermind about it.

 

(What's up with adbots anyway?)

[obfuscator]

And it keeps the fun in counting games tbh.

But it makes it so slow paced. :wall:

 

And dang, didn't know about adbots. In that case, nevermind about it.

 

(What's up with adbots anyway?)

Bots that are scripted to post a certain topic on a certain forum until they are banned. Great for advertising :P

 

Even physical spammers (with a human behind them) would hugely abuse a forum without flood control limitation.

[Jack]

You could perhaps have Flood Control only on for people who have lower than a set post count (i.e. 1500 posts), because really what are the chances that a spammer/bot will spent their time getting 1500 posts to them 'spam' to their hearts content. It looks fine at the moment though.

[Ouchy]

@Jack, if you read the last page, your suggestion have already been posted ;)

 

For everyone, once you experience a real attack from spammers, such as posting porn and no moderators are on, you will be thankful that flood control.

The administrators are grateful giving us 45 seconds, be grateful back.

[Epic]

We have been discussing the possibility of reducing the Flood Control, however it is not possible to restrict it per group thus you'll be unlikely to see it go too low even if it does change.

 

Sorry if I sound a little... Out spoken, but would it not be possible to set it so that after X number of posts, a person is moved to a new user group? It is possible to do this without making any changes that normal people can see. I've played with a number of forum boards, but not this version, so I can't be 100% this is possible. Even adding a requirement of 100 posts would be very effective to stop most ad bots. Also, when a topic or post is reported, is it made invisible, until staff (Moderator) has cleared it? If not, this would make it much easier to combat such problems. Again though, I'm not sure what your limitations are. If ad bots, or massive spam attacks have been a large problem in the past, then I can see how this is being kept as it is. But if there have not been many recent attacks that were not easily handled, perhaps this limit is a tad much.

 

Sorry if it sounds like I'm trying to tell you how to do our job.... Just trying to be helpful.

Ciao

[obfuscator]

We have been discussing the possibility of reducing the Flood Control, however it is not possible to restrict it per group thus you'll be unlikely to see it go too low even if it does change.

 

Sorry if I sound a little... Out spoken, but would it not be possible to set it so that after X number of posts, a person is moved to a new user group? It is possible to do this without making any changes that normal people can see. I've played with a number of forum boards, but not this version, so I can't be 100% this is possible. Even adding a requirement of 100 posts would be very effective to stop most ad bots. Also, when a topic or post is reported, is it made invisible, until staff (Moderator) has cleared it? If not, this would make it much easier to combat such problems. Again though, I'm not sure what your limitations are. If ad bots, or massive spam attacks have been a large problem in the past, then I can see how this is being kept as it is. But if there have not been many recent attacks that were not easily handled, perhaps this limit is a tad much.

 

Sorry if it sounds like I'm trying to tell you how to do our job.... Just trying to be helpful.

Ciao

Your first point is true - it would be technically possible.

 

As for making topics or post invisible on report - imagine how much that would be abused?

 

As an ex staff member I quickly came to realize how many attacks there really are on this board. The majority are dealt with fairly fast, partly because of the flood control. You wouldn't think it, but taking it down 15 seconds would probably quadruple the amount of work needed to remove spam topics/posts.