150 Limit

[Gary]

I don't understand the justification given for the 150 posts per thread restriction.

Is it not the case that only the page of interest, and not the whole thread, is sent when opening the thread ?

If so, how does an overall limit help ?

[Ari Rahikkala]

I think it is going to disrupt many discussions. I don't mean that the coffee shop should be limited (it is one of the only threads with speed problems anyway), but think of Spartan Chronicles, or any serious discussion which just goes on and on. Let's take CyberShy's latest attack against atheists "Prove God wrong and become atheist or vice versa?". 4 pages. But if it was just cut off in third page, it'd mean that any referations to previous pages get very hard.

Bad thing, bad thing! Esp. if your Internet connection is quicker than 14K (I have 56)

[MarkG]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Gary on 05-05-2000 05:47 AM</font>
Is it not the case that only the page of interest, and not the whole thread, is sent when opening the thread ?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>it is not the loading of the html file that we are talking about.
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>If so, how does an overall limit help ?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>what we are talking about is the speed of the cgi scripts.

both the posting script as well as the forum summary script work faster with smaller threads

[MarkG]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by LightEning on 05-05-2000 05:54 AM</font>
But if it was just cut off in third page, it'd mean that any referations to previous pages get very hard.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>with the "anchor hack", each post in each thread has a specific url(example: this <a href="http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum20/HTML/000691.html#3">link</a> points to this post). along with quotes, i dont think referring to a post in another thread is that hard
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited May 05, 2000).]</font>

[Legman]

I don't think it'll be a problem after a few days. We'll get used to this as well, just as we did with layout changes, smilies and whatnot.

When I read the title however, I was hoping it was about a 150 post limit per poster per week. Now that would have an effect on spam! Especially if it was set a bit lower. Forcing people to think before they post and economize their ressources just like IRL.

But I guess not... or just maybe..., admins?

[MarkG]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Legman on 05-05-2000 09:26 AM</font>
When I read the title however, I was hoping it was about a 150 post limit per poster per week.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>it is a bit hard to be done...

[Hugo Rune]

I'm wholeheartedly for. Threads that go longer than about 100-150 usually take ages to load when you're making a reply. Good call.

[Frodo83]

The number of replies to a thread may not necessarily determine how long it is. There are some threads, like the "Propaganda" thread in the OT, that take a very long time to load, despite not having 150 replies, just because everyone's posts are so long.

[SnowFire]

I don't agree with the decision either. Who cares about the scripts? I'm more concerned about loading time, which is set at 50 replies or less.

If you do want to do this, I recommend setting the limit at 250 or something, since 150 is simply too small.

[connorkimbro]

mumble. . grr, i keep typing The Unconquered in the username spot. . grr. . mumble. .

Anyhow, good call admins! I think it's a good idea. It will vastly speed things up, and i don't feel that it will intterupt discussin, as was pointed out a new thread can be started with a think to the old one. If people are involved enough in a discussion enough to get it to 150 posts, starting a new thread with a link to the old one won't slow them down.

[Mao]

*sob* *sob*

...*sniff* *sniff*

Meany! My shop! My Shop! Oh for the love of God won't somebody please think of the shop!

[MarkG]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by SnowFire on 05-05-2000 01:35 PM</font>
I don't agree with the decision either. Who cares about the scripts? I'm more concerned about loading time, which is set at 50 replies or less.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>loading time(when viewing the forum summary, or when making a reply) is indeed related to how fast the scripts run
<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>If you do want to do this, I recommend setting the limit at 250 or something, since 150 is simply too small.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>how many of the threads of the last day are over 150 posts? what's their percentage?

[Smash]

I'm noticing an improvement.Perhaps even lower.No big deal to make a new thread.

"blah blah blah discussion continued...."

how bout 100?

[Caesar the Great]

How about a 151 post limit?

CLOSE MAO DOWN!!!

I guess now he'll have to spam on even more threads

Anyway... I think that this is fair... but this may cause multiple threads on the same topic to emerge... anyway... I think its good... carry on

[ghen]

I think its a very good idea, I'm just mad at ming's 'holier-than-thou' thread. What happened to the 'keep the discussion to one thread so we don't clutter the front page' rule? Now there are 2 threads in OT and one here! I mean wtf? I will see you all in a week.

.
.
.
.
.
you know, I take time with my double logins.. fill 'em out, make 'em look nice Its a work of art that gets deleted I tell you!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by ghen (edited May 08, 2000).]</font>