Creation of new threads restricted to 1/person/day in OT

[Narck]

<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 My Wife Hates CIV on 06-14-2000 11:41 AM</font>
I can't even start a freaking thread in OT anymore today! This is what I was going to post before MarkG screwed everything up. ... ...
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>Hmmm... good thing you couldn't post that in the OT. The announcement after all did say to keep the discussion in this thread over here

[Frodo83]

I disagree as well. I almost never start threads, but today I thought of two seperate subjects I would like to discuss. Now, I'm not going to die before tomorrow, so it's not a big deal to me. However, I wonder if this will have as much effect on "quality posting" as it will on spam. You are restricting the good along with the bad. I agree with your intentions, but I would rather have Ming & Mleonard deal with people posting too many worthless threads the "manual" way. That way you're not keeping anyone from posting multiple good threads. It seems like a case of quality & crap vs. no quality & no crap. I would prefer the former. The latter seems to equal no reason to post at all.

[Gatekeeper]

Markos, et al.:

On average, I create less than one thread per day in the entirety of Apolyton. With that in mind, though, I think the "one topic post per day in Apolyton OT" is a bit restrictive.

Using myself as an example, there are times when two unrelated subjects are of interest to me and — wishing immediate discussion — would want to post them in OT. With the new system in place, that wouldn't be possible (unless one were to combine the *unrelated* subjects into a single topic). My interest may wane over the intervening 24 hours (or, more likely, I'd lose key points ... that "lightbulb" effect doesn't always last forever) and, thus, a potential subject would be lost.

A compromise would be two topic posts in a 24-hour cycle. IOW, if TP No.1 shows up at 1 p.m. Apolyton time, only one other TP post from said poster could show up afterwards until 1 p.m. the next day. No matter the timing of the second post, it could not affect the next 24-period as long as it appeared in the first 24-hour period. Umm, that's not confusing, is it?

Anyway, just my two bits.

CYBERAmazon

[Graag]

My average topics per day will be around .25, but often I like to post 2 or maybe more. For instance one about random philosophy, and one on a current event.

I think this is a bizarre, bad and pointless decision. It could have been discussed first This will make the OT a less fun forum to visit and use. I don't consider myself a spammer, and I certainly don't start topics frivilously. This will make the OT less enjoyable for me.

Graag

------------------
"Fumer provoque le cancer - Roken veroorzaakt kanker - Rauchen verursacht Krebs"

[Bird]

<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 Alexander's Horse on 06-14-2000 09:23 PM</font>
Hmm, never thought of it like that......I now support the new restrictions
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Now that's more like it....

I have a question though. What happens when I start one of those superpopular threads I'm famous for and it hits the 150 post mark in the usual 6-8 hours? Can I start the part II thread that day or do I have to wait?

[Franklin]

MarkG,

I may be the only one, but I have no problem with the restriction. But then I don't think I have EVER created two threads in one day.

Personally I thought Ming and MLenord were doing a good job of keeping the Spam to a minimum.

everyone else, I think that it is worth a shot to try the new restrictions for a while, before we get all paranoid about what might happen. In fact I would let it ride for at least a week or two (not just a few days) to see the 'actual results' of the experiment. HOWEVER, MarkG and DanQ must be willing to abandon this policy if it does not work the way they intended it to

Again I, for one as someone who has been around since the beginning of Apolyton, think a short 1-2 week experiment would not constitute great harm to this site or it's boards.

[Paul]

<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 Smash on 06-14-2000 12:25 PM</font>
Hmmmm...a forum you can't post in .What a unique idea!

I hope this doesn't steer the OT crowd to on topic forums.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

That depends. If they would post meaningful on-topic posts it wouldn't be a problem, but if they were going to post off-topic posts in the on-topic forums it would certainly be a problem.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Paul (edited June 14, 2000).]</font>

[MichaeltheGreat]

MarkG - one practical effect I can see is more threadjacking / less focused topics. If something from the US elections to Euro2000 to $%^& Enigma pops up in a thread, the creator of the thread can't branch the discussion into a second thread until 24 hours has passed.

People won't complain "there's this really awesome thread I couldn't start" - they'll just be less inclined to start anything. Hello SidGames! I don't think that's the direction Apolyton wants to go?

[Mark von Wagner]

MarkG, I have not been affected by this rule. However, if it had been put into effect a few months ago, I would have been. I have only posted 2 new threads in the Off-topic forum ever, but those two threads were posted within 15 minutes of each other because the first thread vanished.

[Black Dragon]

I really don't see why you are imposing this on it. You are doing this in an attempt to solve an OT problem, but almost all OTers, including both moderators, don't see this as a good solution.

[Victor Galis]

Quel outrage! Though I do not think I've ever posted two threads in OT on the same day, I still feel oppressed, knowing that I can't. I think this wll lead to more DLs. If I want to post more than one thread I have no qualms about creating a new login.

[Alexander's Horse]

*Horse gallops through the thread, a flaming toilet roll dangling from his tail, "The Sky is falling! The Sky is falling!*

*shrieks, drops dead*

[Alexander's Horse]

The last post is but a small example of the kind of post soon coming to an on-topic thread near you

Carry on.

[UEC]

The implimentation of this proves you are bigger fools then I ever thought you ever were!!!


REMEMBER BLACK SATURDAY!!!!!!!

------------------
Thank You,
Govenor Metzler
Audentior Province of Shireroth
Citizen and govenment official ofAudentior Independent Nation
UECPC@mindspring.com
Moderator
AIM: dudeatpinkfloyd

"BOOOMism the other, other white meat!

[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 Jasonian on 06-14-2000 09:13 PM</font>
"Argh. I'm upset. Do this. Do that. I don't even understand the problem. Blah blah blah."

Ok, I think this thread has become a battleground of posters vs MarkG. How annoying.

MarkG, will you please breifly sum up what exactly it is you want this to acomplish so we all aren't taking wild stabs or cheap shots?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>ok, what we are trying to do
1) protect the forum from organized spam attacks
2) protect the forum from "god, I'm bored, let's start 20 threads to see if I get banned" incidents
3) possibly lower the number of totally idiotic threads(that remains to be seen )
4) give more room on page 1 for more people(e.g. avoid "Page 1: the kingdom of nimrod" effects )
4) take away some of the work the moderators have to do to control spammers

benedetti, do you see no logic in all of the above?

Adam Smith, I dont know if your idea is doable

Lancer, I dont know if people are leaving the forums, what I know is that over the last 6 months we made new records in total pageviews all over the site, and right now we are very close to that

MasterBob, "Off-Topic" should mean we can post anything we want.
You CAN still post anything you want(check with the FAQ first )!

Uurban Ranger "You can't eliminate spam unless you totally prohibit postings"
it's worth trying, no?

Victor Galis, do you feel opressed because you cant go to the "ladies room"?

Btw, Ming posted elsewhere that you should send me a mail whenever you need the second thread during the day. Originally I was thinking of a post on this thread, but mail sounds good as well. So, do mail me when you need a second thread.
I have goten 2 such mails. The thing is, it was done by people who started threads in the OT about this decision

btw(2), on the issue "OT is about casual chat with our friends", there is always the Coffee shop...