Jump to content

Should There Be A Limit


Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Upon further consideration, I think fewer topics would just lead to more of them drifting off-topic in all different directions.

Flood control doesn’t automatically equate to fewer topics, just fewer topics started by a given account within a specified time period. Anyway, I don’t follow your logic, why would fewer topics invoke more off topic conversation?

 

Actually, I think the likelihood of excessive and confusing off topic banter increases when a given member has several topics running simultaneously.

 

...(For the record, that's why I don't even bother trying to read "Cheers!" :()

 

Do you suppose anyone has read that entire behemoth (Cheers)? :cry:<_<

Edited by sept1c_tank
Link to comment
Anyway, I don’t follow your logic, why would fewer topics invoke more off topic conversation?

My logic is pretty simple. Suppose I have three questions today: 1) How do I interpret a certain part of the guideilnes? 2) Does someone know how to get EasyGPS to work with my particular GPS? 3) Can someone tell me why I'm getting an error message when I try to access a certain part of the website?

 

If I'm limited to one topic, my options are as follows. First, I can put them all in the one topic, leading to a confusing discussion. Second, I can ask in another active thread, which may only be peripherally related, leading to a confusing discussion. Third, I can revive the last closely-related thread, which has had no posts since May 2002, leading to a confusing discussion.

 

Since I've probably created a total of four topics in my time on the forums, it would hardly make an impact on me as a poster. As a reader, well...I figure people are going to post as much as they want, whether it's a new topic or not, so it's easier for me to follow the discussions if people aren't limited in their ability to break their comments off into new topics once they outgrow the current topic.

Link to comment

The short answer is, IMO, no. There shouldn't be a limit on topics you should post. I think you (general you) should not need to be compelled to post to every topic that comes up. The uninteresting ones will quickly drop off while the ones that are interesting will rise to the top.

 

However I expect based on this comment someone will turn around and post a bunch of useless posts to make a point, so don't do it. I know how you jokers are <_<

Edited by Jeremy
Link to comment
The short answer is, IMO, no. There shouldn't be a limit on topics you should post. 

 

The use of the word limit, in my original post, was perhaps a poor choice of words. I’m (not advocating) discussing new topic flood control. If flood control is not a good idea for new topics, please explain the logic for flood control on new posts, which already exists.

 

I think you (general you) should not need to be compelled to post to every topic that comes up.

 

Compulsive Posting Disorder is another topic, but you’re correct; one should not feel compelled to post to topics that are of no interest. <_<

 

The uninteresting ones will quickly drop off while the ones that are interesting will rise to the top.

 

Right again. :cry::(

Link to comment

<_< This is kind of on topic but I think it is common decency to at least scan the replies since you last replied before making a new reply.

It seems that some folks are not doing this.

 

And seriously I don't think that we should be putting "governors" on the freedom to post within the guidelines of this forum.

Part of my problem is that I literally got my butt shot up to keep our system of semi free speech and I have to continually remind myself that this applies to idiots and morons too.

Go figure. :cry:

Link to comment
...And seriously I don't think that we should be putting "governors" on the freedom to post within the guidelines of this forum.

Part of my problem is that I literally got my butt shot up to keep our system of semi free speech and I have to continually remind myself that this applies to idiots and morons too.

Go figure. <_<

As a huge proponent of freedom of speech, I will reiterate, flood control does not limit free speech, it merely governs how fast you can talk. :cry::(

Link to comment
..Part of my problem is that I literally got my butt shot up to keep our system of semi free speech and I have to continually remind myself that this applies to idiots and morons too.

...

Thanks for risking your butt (and everything else) to serve our country. Because you did it, I didn't have to. <_<

 

As for freedom of speech applying to morons, I wouldn't think any reminders would be necessary, as the evidence of their entitlement is all too abundant. :cry:

Link to comment
The short answer is, IMO, no. There shouldn't be a limit on topics you should post. I think you (general you) should not need to be compelled to post to every topic that comes up. The uninteresting ones will quickly drop off while the ones that are interesting will rise to the top.

 

However I expect based on this comment someone will turn around and post a bunch of useless posts to make a point, so don't do it. I know how you jokers are <_<

Thank you Jeremy for saying no to the limit.

 

Its good to know its unlikely to happen. If I pay for a membership for the website I should be able to post as I please.

Link to comment
Why does that same logic not apply to new topics?  :D  :blink:

It doesn't.

I don't understand. You say the reason for post flood control is spam, but that reasoning doesn't apply to new topics. Maybe we're just playing semantics. What exactly do you mean by spam and how does post flood control prevent it (serious question)? :rolleyes::blink:

Link to comment

like this.

 

I was gonna do it all in one word posts like I see happen all the time in the forums without flood control, but I didn't want to sit in front of the computer for 1/2 hour for 1 real post. It can get really annoying when some goofball decides to boost his all-important post count by posting 50 or 100 one word posts in a row.

 

This took me close to 10 minutes the way it was. Without flood control, I could have done it one word at a time in about a minute.

 

You don't need it as much for topics because you have to enter a topic, a subject, and then the post- it kinda has the same effect as fllod control in itself.

Link to comment
...You don't need it as much for topics because you have to enter a topic, a subject, and then the post- it kinda has the same effect as fllod control in itself.

I see what you mean about how annoying that would be. I’ve seen the same thing happen with topics and a moderator has to close them. Unfortunately, the closed topic is still there for a day or two.

 

If a poster could open only a limited number of topics in a given time period (topic flood control), he would be more selective in his thoughts, thus avoiding cluttering the boards with spam or useless banter. :lol:

Link to comment
I think we should have a rule for how many new rules a person can suggest we have a rule for.

 

Check!  That's my first.

I see so many rants of "NO MORE RULES" both direct and sarcastic.... so I better add two more cents...

 

SELF-REGULATION avoids rules.

 

It doesn't take much to listen more carefully and think a bit more before posting a comment. Heck, I don't care if people rant and make purely self-serving comments as long as they thought them through. :D

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...