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

[My Wife Hates CIV]

yeah testing is fine, but why so extreme. you dont test a 5mph speed limit first to see if that will save lives. if 3 threads a day solves the problem...

[CapTVK]

While I'm not a regular OT-poster I find 'one-thread a day'-limit a little bit excessive. I may not post about several topics every day but I would like to have (here it comes...) the freedom to do so.

It seems average posters have to pay for the crimes of a few bad apples. Is this the best solution to stop spam? And what happens when this rule is implemented? Won't people start posting their drivel on the On-Topic forums? Giving Ming even more work?
What then? Put "1-thread a day"-limits on those forums too?


MarkG please,

Only "1 thread a day" is absurd, this calls for a compromise.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by CapTVK (edited June 14, 2000).]</font>

[Colon™]

Apolyton OT would be an interesting subject for sociologists. Seriously, I'm sure anyone who's a bit familiar with sociologist and human behaviour recognizes the patters that occured in OT. At first it was small scaled and self regulating. As more people got in the community feeling lessened and more formal rules became required and some sort of hierarchy was esthablished with a moderator.
The result of regulation was attempts in deceiving them, which in turn made the rules even more stringent and detailed.

Take double logins, I remember the first ones, it was a sort of a joke, but a bit annoying to some so it was forbidden. (I got a ban for a week myself)
DL's were surpressed for a while but they returned but the difference was they often weren't used anymore for jokes but for the thrill of breaking the rules and for actually damaging others. Rules got more stringent, hotmail accounts got forbidden, but the phenomenon anything but continue to exist. At the moment people are bragging how many times they got cought and how many DL's they created and still have. Even when someone doesn't mean it when he says he has a DL he's still making a joke of the rule.

The rules more that get created the harder it will be to make sure they're all abided and the less rules there are abided, the less respect will exists for rules in general.

The most anoying thing is that people who do not intend harm to anyone have to worry that they don't break rules, often because they aren't sure what's allowed and what's not.

Some clear and strict rules are necessary but this sort of microregulating is contraproductive.

MarkG, how little trust you may have in self regulation (which is understandable after seeing certain excesses in OT) this is exaggerated. I do not want to having to calculate how many minutes I have still left before I can start another thread in fear of getting somesort of reprimande.

[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 Atahualpa on 06-14-2000 01:33 PM</font>
You want quality of posts? Go to CtP2 Forums! Go to Civ3 Forums! Go to Civ2 Forums! Heck, why do you want quality posts on OT? Is it all for bandwith?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>the main idea is to reduce spam and to protect the forum from attacks. if some improvment in the quality of the posts comes with it, it would be great.
<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>Well then add an autodelete function for OT posts that are older than 2 weeks. I mean, nobody ever reads them again.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>actually, only a small portion of the OT is archived. the vast majority of the threads is indeed deleted after two weeks
<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>IMO, OT is a place to meet when there is not much going on in the Civ genre. OT is a place to discuss political views/matters,... with people who share the same love for one game: CIVILIZATION. And it should stay that way!
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>I agree with you! But this doesnt mean that one should be able to start 10 threads in one day!

Isn't this something that people have been complaining about for so long??
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited June 14, 2000).]</font>

[Starchild]

Well now...talk about the straw that will break the camel's back.

[N35t0r]

MarkG, the , and the ) aren't part of the URL of this thread, right?

[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 Colon on 06-14-2000 02:53 PM</font>
The most anoying thing is that people who do not intend harm to anyone have to worry that they don't break rules, often because they aren't sure what's allowed and what's not.

Some clear and strict rules are necessary but this sort of microregulating is contraproductive.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>I'm not sure where you see this. The faq is basically unchanged for almost a year. The rules have been repeated by the moderators millions of times. Can you give me an example of something YOU are not sure about the rules?
<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>MarkG, how little trust you may have in self regulation (which is understandable after seeing certain excesses in OT) this is exaggerated. I do not want to having to calculate how many minutes I have still left before I can start another thread in fear of getting somesort of reprimande.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>oh I'm the first to say all the times that I prefer self-regulation from moderatorship. But when things get out of hand, the owner of the forums(this isn't usenet) has to take measures

beyond that, I dont see where the fear is. you will simply get an error message(noone will see this, it's not a public execution you know ) and you'll have to leave the window open until the time passes or save the contents of the thread on notepad or something...

[MarkG]

HSFB, what do you mean?

[CapTVK]

<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>]I agree with you! But this doesnt mean that one should be able to start 10 threads in one day!

Isn't this something that people have been complaining about for so long??

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Just how many people complained about excessive thread posting in OT? A 100? or 10? In the first case you might take a look at limiting the number of threads one can post on one day. In the 2nd case I would take their complaints into consideration and try to promote self-regulation. And self-regulation works best when there are a FEW but CLEAR rules, not a bunch of "thou shalt not..." commandments.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I don't like it.

[Ming]

Well CapTVK... I will have to agree that spam, and the number of new threads started by individuals is the number one complaint I get. People are always complaining that threads get knocked to page 2 in a matter of hours because of the spam and repetitive threads. Heck, sometimes, the difference in posting times between the top and bottom of page one is less than three hours.

Yes, it is a problem... and Yes, it is the one we get the most complaints on.

I'm just not sure this is the best way to deal with it... but we will all see

------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

[DanS]

Points of clarification, please...

(1) If you post an on-topic topic, are you then forbidden to post an off-topic topic in the time period? Can you say that quickly ten times?

(2) If you post an off-topic topic, are you then forbidden to post an on-topic topic during the same time period?

(3) Are moderators also forbidden to post more than once in the same time period?

MarkG: why not create an ad hoc rule, rather than an automated one? Ming seems to think it would be more "efficient" for the mods in the long run.

Also, I "sort of" call into question your intent. If attacks were the posts to be guarded against, then you would institute the rule forum-wide. But you aren't doing this, which leads me to believe that you are trying to regulate the content.

Believe me, there are better, positive ways to increase the quality of OT.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You bastards! You ****ing bastards!

Make it 5!

[Black Dragon]

"unfortunately, the limit can only be on a time basis(e.g. "1 thread/X numbers of
days(or hours)" and not "X number of threads/day")"

Why not do it the Old Fashion way then, and have Ming/Mleonard enforce a 2/3 threads a day rule. If they seen someone with more than two threads on the front page- they can check the date of the thread posted?

Also, mabye you should check with the guy who runs the forums at www.battle.net/forums

I know their they have a 2 posts/ 2 hours rule.

Also, while I think it would be good if we could stop people from flooding the OTF with pointless posts- you are also stopping people from making good OT posts as well- I can recall several occasions when people have made 2, good, serious, off topic thread in a day. You are killing the good along with the bad.

[MLeonard]

I have to disagree with this as well MarkG. Many people might only have a certain amount of time during the week to post their thoughts, and if they think of a bunch of legitamite topics they want to post, they will forget about them if they can only do one per day. It might prevent problems that Ming and I have to deal with occasionally, but I don't think it's worth it.