[Simon]

The minimum time delay require between posts is currently 30 seconds IIRC. How about increasing that?

I get the impression that there's a decreasing SNR on this board lately and I think it has a lot to do with rabid thread crapping. And quite obviously some members seem to put increasing their post count before the quality of their replies. Things like "me too" or "what he said" ad little value to the board. Likewise if you enter a forum and see that the same member has posted the last post in over a dozen threads within 15 minutes you do wonder what the average quality of these posts will be. Actual inspection then usually confirms the concern.

So why not increase this interval to something like three minutes? A well though out response or an actual technical insight usually needs more time to come up with. And if somebody is that fast, the post still can be submitted a bit later on. I'm sure if somebody has a good post they'll be willing to put up with this since writing a smart reply is usually not done within half a minute. They would on the other hand be rewarded by not having to sift through a lot of contentless crap while reading a thread. My hope would be that this might encourage people to only reply when they actually have something to say.

Why not increase the limit and observe the effect it has during a certain trial period. After an evaluation a final decision could be taken. That said, I'd be interested to know if suppressing all post count information would have a similar effect to what I am expecting from the proposed change.

[turtle777]

yeah, what he said

-t

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by Simon 

So why not increase this interval to something like three minutes? A well though out response or an actual technical insight usually needs more time to come up with.

Why I agree with you about the post count./thread crapping stuff. I disagree that changing the time to 3 minutes will help. I think forcing people to wait 3 minutes is on the excessive side and actually will actually result in less posting (quality posts too). I can compose two maybe more well thought out cohesive posts well within 3 minutes.

You want better quality discussion? Forcing people to wait 3 minutes to post will have the opposite affect.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Interesting thought. Do people do a lot of high interval posting outside the Lounge? (I assume this isn't in reference to the Lounge.) Actually, what thread did cause this thought?

[sek929]

3 minutes is way to long.

Case and point is my most recent thread in the lounge. I had many replies within a short time of each-other but they had plenty of substance.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by sek929 

they had plenty of substance.

Hence the toilet paper.
Blame :maroma: for starting that joke, I wouldn't have said anything

[peeb]

One of the issues with this is that some people open a lot of tabs, read and reply to threads, and then post all of them at more or less the same time. I don't think there is as technical fix for rubbish posts.

[MacosNerd]

One other point I'd like to make.
So what. Who cares if there's a lot of me toos and plus one type of posts. Yes at times there's a lot and I agree with the OP but so what. Most people just need to scroll down further. If a thread is getting seriously off track then the mods should jump in and restore order

[Dakar the Fourth]

Personally, I don't see too many of those. And occasionally, the if someone makes a good point, I like to acknowledge it briefly. No need to force 3 lines for no reason.

[Randman]

Originally Posted by Simon 

A well though out response or an actual technical insight usually needs more time to come up with.

Maybe with the poli lounge, but some threads don't need 3 minutes of thinking to respond to.

[mduell]

I get hit by the 30 second rule about once a day, but it's not too bad. Extending it to 3 minutes would force me to spend a lot more time on the site just to make some quick replies.

[Simon]

The very fact that some people would need to spend a lot more time online is the intent behind the idea. That way some of the asinine posts wouldn't appear simply because people wouldn't wait for 180 seconds to post their "me too blabla" baloney. It should be inconvenient for knee-jerk posts. On the other hand a well thought out post with some actual content that ads value to the discussion will take at least as long as the delay time to write in the first place.

MacNN is already a big board. It doesn't need more posts. It needs better posts. The currently observed post count jacking achieves the exact opposite.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Simon 

That way some of the asinine posts wouldn't appear simply because people wouldn't wait for 180 seconds to post their "me too blabla" baloney. It should be inconvenient for knee-jerk posts.

You are making absolutely wrong assumptions, and a 3 min rule would NOT change anything.

Do you really think that post whores have limited time and are impatient ?
People that want to post crap will do so, no matter what.

A 3 min rule will not change anything. Even if you wait 3 min each time, you can still make dozens of posts per hour.

-t

[MacosNerd]

Originally Posted by Simon 

That way some of the asinine posts wouldn't appear simply because people wouldn't wait for 180 seconds to post their "me too blabla" baloney. It should be inconvenient for knee-jerk posts.

And inconvenient for everyone else posting as well.

You're basically asking the Mods to punish all posters for a few posts that you have a problem with. Do what the rest of us do, scroll down. Not everyone needs > 180 seconds to compose a response and forcing them to wait is ludicrous.

If you find that some people are irking you, then put them on the ignore list.

[Randman]

Make it 3 days.

[rickey939]

I really like...

[rickey939]

...the idea.

[turtle777]

Ha.

[turtle777]

teh

[turtle777]

funnay.

[Randman]

Spammers.

[turtle777]

P.S. OP is right. This would have been utterly unpossible with the 3 min delay.

-t