PDA

View Full Version : Should The Admins Limit The Number Of Threads Posters Can Start?


SelesFan70
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:32 PM
It seems we've endured a plethora of "new" threads (old ideas, though) from certain posters. Should there be a limit on "new" threads posters can start? :tape:

creep
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:40 PM
You won't be asking this when Monica returns.

Ballbasher
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:42 PM
Yes, 100 threads a month :eek:
Depends on the poster :tape:

vogus
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:48 PM
This is an interesting question. I think 20 threads a week would be a pretty reasonable limit. On the other hand the board has seemed to regulate itself quite well. Serial thread starters/trolls like the current "Davenport,Seles" posters come, start a ton of mostly dopey threads, realize they are not receiving the desired attention, and leave. And when self-regulation fails, the admins usually step in. But i wouldn't be opposed to some sort of cap on thread-starting.

smiler
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:49 PM
at the moment 6 people have voted although it says 5 & each of the six are for different options, it says they're each at 20% lol that adds up to 120%!

PaulieM
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:52 PM
depends on the poster. i think most people are pretty good about not posting complete nonsense or wasting people's time with stuff that's been discussed over and over again. but i guess if people are silly enough to keep posting in those threads and discussing the same stuff over and ovre again there's no point limiting it. i'd support a limit on the number of threads you can post per hour though, some people just need to be slowed down. :)

SelesFan70
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:54 PM
You won't be asking this when Monica returns.

Yes, I would. :angel:

Maria Croft
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:55 PM
5 a day seems about enough I think

the jamierbelyea
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:56 PM
at the moment 6 people have voted although it says 5 & each of the six are for different options, it says they're each at 20% lol that adds up to 120%!

That's because it's a multiple choice poll. They are dividing it by the number of posters voted, but some posters voted multiple times. Thus the percentages won't add up to 100%.

Rather then comparing each one and adding them up to 100% a multplie choice compares the option to itself. Like each option is a yes or no, poll. I hope that makes sense. :)

creep
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:57 PM
Yes, I would. :angel:

You only say this cause you know Monica's never coming back. NEVER EVER, EVER NEVER. ;) :)

-VSR-
Feb 19th, 2006, 04:59 PM
Depends on the poster. :haha:

Now, who would that be? :p

creep
Feb 19th, 2006, 05:00 PM
I think it's a case of, make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.

lucashg
Feb 19th, 2006, 05:06 PM
"Yes, but what's a fair number?"
"Depends on the poster :tape:"

What's a fair number? I guess vogus and PaulieM said it best, with 20 a week, but also limiting the number per hour. Like, 1 thread per hour, 20 threads a week, that'd slow down a lot of silly, nonsense and repeated threads.

Kirt12255
Feb 19th, 2006, 05:10 PM
:wavey:

How about if people are posting bs....don't encourage them to post again by replying I say!:wavey: