Zone1 Can we have a threads per hour limit on USMB?

[flacaltenn]

There is a poster today who is creating around 6 threads per hour. That is ridiculous.

about 8000 posts per day and 200 threads per day. Six IS a bit high from standpoint of DEFENDING them. If you're REALLY interested in the topics -- you should really save the time to defend ALL of them.

I think as long as they are not dominating one forum -- it's not a big problem.

 

[Road Runner]

I think as long as they are not dominating one forum -- it's not a big problem.

Or the exact same topic. I mean everybody already knows how awesome I am so it doesn't really need to be repeated. (JK )

 

[MarathonMike]

about 8000 posts per day and 200 threads per day. Six IS a bit high from standpoint of DEFENDING them. If you're REALLY interested in the topics -- you should really save the time to defend ALL of them.

I think as long as they are not dominating one forum -- it's not a big problem.

I don't know what you are talking about. Me defending threads I don't want to see? I don't get it. But whatever it's your board.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Feedback on this forum is comical

 

[miketx]

Or the exact same topic. I mean everybody already knows how awesome I am so it doesn't really need to be repeated. (JK )

Tell us again, I love to hear it!

 

[Road Runner]

Tell us again, I love to hear it!

Thanks, but you're awesome too you know.

 

[flacaltenn]

I don't know what you are talking about. Me defending threads I don't want to see? I don't get it. But whatever it's your board.

From a rule making POView -- we think about how many threads a day a member can put up and defend in discussion. Already a policy that it's one thread/ per topic/ per day for instance. Also a policy NOT to let one member DOMINATE the listings of a particular forum in proportion to the # of threads that land there daily.

From a member READING the forum, POView -- like you -- If you dont want to see them in the listings -- put the member on your ignore list -- they DO disappear.

Personally, I think that sucks because when it's a partisan thing and you block the members of the other tribe - you're REALLY only getting filtered news and value from USMB. It good AT LEAST to know what ALL the news and hot issues are from "the other side".

WE MIGHT in the future for instance -- restrict the Zone1 forums so that members can put up only ONE thread per day in any particular Z1 forum.

 

[MinTrut]

I think if it's spread out throughout the day and not in the same hour than it's not that big of a deal, but six threads in the SAME hour!? Holy cow!!

And mind you, this is on multiple sites. Quite astonishing actually.

 

[MinTrut]

^ Numbers 2 and 3 puts it on each user to decide, and is not anything that can be declared “Nazism”. Great tools actually.

Yes, but it's sad that it's necessary for flooding/spamming.

All sites have a shortage of thoughtful thread starters, and an overabundance of blockheads who for whatever reason don't think before they post, includng checking to see if a topic already has a thread.

Or six threads.

The blockheads treat forums like a refrigerator which needs yet MORE superfluous notes and magnets like an avalanche on its front.

There's generally a direct inversion of people who actually have something to say saying these things with any real frequency, and those who can't stop saying just about anything all the time.

Tragedy of the commons.

 

[MinTrut]

I think if it's spread out throughout the day and not in the same hour than it's not that big of a deal, but six threads in the SAME hour!? Holy cow!!

Agreed, but either way, it means a small number of not particularly thoughtful or invested posters dominate a site with shallow, repetitive, superfluous threads which ultimately bog forums down.

I understand that they may have issues which cause them to do this - particularly posters who operate in this fashion on multiple sites - but maybe they could play Tetris or Candy Crush or do something else instead of littering so many sites.

 

[MinTrut]

But what's a fellow going to do when he finds out that some guy in a band nobody here has never heard of said something about something that nobody at all cares about, and it burns so hot in him that he feels absolutely compelled to let everybody know?

Again and again and again on multiple sites with no particular value or insight attached.

The superflux of blockheads...

 

[ClaireH]

Yes, but it's sad that it's necessary for flooding/spamming.

All sites have a shortage of thoughtful thread starters, and an overabundance of blockheads who for whatever reason don't think before they post, includng checking to see if a topic already has a thread.

Or six threads.

The blockheads treat forums like a refrigerator which needs yet MORE superfluous notes and magnets like an avalanche on its front.

There's generally a direct inversion of people who actually have something to say saying these things with any real frequency, and those who can't stop saying just about anything all the time.

Tragedy of the commons

Agree- the phrase “within reasonable limits” attests to the fact that the founding fathers created the electoral college a good effort at checks and balances, knowing what happens within mob rule, anything goes, mindsets.

 

[ClaireH]

Agreed, but either way, it means a small number of not particularly thoughtful or invested posters dominate a site with shallow, repetitive, superfluous threads which ultimately bog forums down.

I understand that they may have issues which cause them to do this - particularly posters who operate in this fashion on multiple sites - but maybe they could play Tetris or Candy Crush or do something else instead of littering so many sites.

Perfect suggestion- Candy Crush! Hahaha I wonder if we did a random poll how many would admit to playing that supposedly addictive game that once you play, you can never go back to living a normal life!