Creation of New Threads Restricted to 1/person/day in OT Part II

[Adam Smith]

A couple of additional thoughts:

1. It does not appear that the proposed changes would stop spammers who dig up old threads and post them on Page 1, which we have seen in the past.

2. It appears that the current 'e-mail request for an additional tread' system will eventually generate a steady stream of e-mails. Mark and Dan, would you rather have that than having to deal with the occasional spammer?

3. To the people who have griped aboout rules in the past, this is why there are rules. Continued abuse eventually gets to be a headache for the owners and moderators. Perhaps heavier penalties for spammers eg longer IP bans and Village Idiot title as suggested by Hugo Rune would be helpful.
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Adam Smith (edited June 15, 2000).]</font>

[Murgatroyd]

To protest:
Start your daily thread each day.

Murgatroyd

------------------
Repeal The 1 Thread/Day Limit!!!

[Robert]

I'm not sure if my replies makes any sence but I make it anyway.

There are maaaany days I don't post new threads at all. And there are days I post 4 new threads (very rare, but it happened)

It's impossible to spread 4 threads over 4 days in some cases.

If there are spam problems in the OT there is only ONE solution, and that solution is more moderators.

I'm completely against it.

CyberShy

[Provost Harrison]

For my 1.3 penceworth at current exchange rates:

Examples of where I have posted more than one thread a day:

'Athlon owners of the world, unite' (about AMD/Intel competition) and 'Pour La Republique Francaise' (about lack of French Apolyton posters), neither spam threads.

Or, 'Dale Winton and Carol Vorderman are hell bent on global domination' (about the dominance of British TV by the same presenters) or 'I hope AMD aren't getting all Intel on us' (again about Intel vs AMD, and AMD beginning to use tactics more like Intel), neither span threads, and both posted on the same day.

Or, 'The things we do for science' (an explanation of some of the more perculiar experiments I do, and question whether anyone else has to do weird stuff) or 'The drug culture...' (Curiosity into why people feel compelled to take drugs). No spam there. Nope. Not at all.

'Money...it's role has gone too far.' (analysis into the role of currency and wealth in modern society) and 'Sods Theorem...' (irreverent analysis into that expression 'Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong'). Again, not spam.

Or alternatively. 'The Duke of Edinburgh says something sensible!?' (about Prince Philip breaking the habit of a lifetime and saying something of worth) or 'What is it to be 'normal'?' (analysis into what makes the common man tick, and my problem with this)

***Also note that these have been found in the off-topic itself, without even diving into the archives where I would find many more examples. And I am not a regular new post starter.

That is an example of how I have flashes of inspiration. All these are examples of threads I have posted on the same day, none of which are spam (I don't post spam threads). So don't restrict those of us who do produce more than one good posts a day. THis example, will, of course, by emailed to markg@apolyton.net if he so wishes to see peoples examples of why they vehemently oppose these haf-baked ideas

We can also already see people trying to use up their post!!!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Provost Harrison (edited June 15, 2000).]</font>

[adaMada]

MarkG:
Your intentions are good (I'd like to see another method of reaching the end result), but you just can't do what you're doing.

First thing is that one post per day is just too few. You can have two totally legit. posts in the same day--Esp. if you are sitting in front of your computer, spending your time on apolyton. Are you going to force people to wait until tomarow to post? Besides, what is tomarow? Tomarow in <u>which timezone</u>? It might be tomarow, and a person still might not be able to post...

More importantly, this defies your own rules. According to the 'new' rules of apolyton, you can't post on a thread that has more than or equal to 150 posts. <u>THIS COULD, HOWEVER, PREVENT SOMEONE FROM OPENING A NEW THREAD TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION!!</u> Problems with this would be especially prevaliant where a specific chain or thread of threads 'belonged' to one persion (like the coffie shop threads and mao). If a new thread wasn't started by someone who hadn't posted yet, then, in effect, you would be forcing people to continue to post on the old thread and risk banning, OR NOT POST AT ALL. Saying 'NOT POST AT ALL' wouldn't really be fair, so you'll have to ammend that rule. Furthermore, many people would be hesadint to use their one and only post on starting a continuation, so, in all licklyhood, a perfectly good, honest thread could be distroyed by these two polacys.


MarkG, we really need a reply on the second point, because we need to know what to do. Please don't ignore this post (which you do sometimes).

In conclusion:
GS: Should you ever update your list (or make a new one), then put me on the 'agianst'.

------------------
adaMada
adamada@springmail.com
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by adaMada (edited June 15, 2000).]</font>

[MarkG]

1) noone will be banned for posting on a thread after the 150th post. we never said anything like this. the opposite has been posted several times

2) I'm sure in a thread with 150 posts there will be a participant who hasnt started a thread in that day and will be able to start the new one. in the bottom line, ask the moderator to do it...

[adaMada]

<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 MarkG on 06-15-2000 05:25 PM</font>
1) noone will be banned for posting on a thread after the 150th post. we never said anything like this. the opposite has been posted several times

2) I'm sure in a thread with 150 posts there will be a participant who hasnt started a thread in that day and will be able to start the new one. in the bottom line, ask the moderator to do it...
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Banned? You're right, I was exaggerating. You can, however, get in trouble for posting well beyond the 150th post, and you're new rules are going to force people to do this. Not every time, but its bound to happen some time.

------------------
adaMada
adamada@springmail.com

[Provost Harrison]

People may be unwilling to use their 'thread du jour' on someone elses topic! They may want it for an interesting debate they themselves want to make but can't think of at the time.

[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>You can, however, get in trouble for posting well beyond the 150th post
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>when did we say that?

[Steve Clark]

Put me down for Restricted to 0/person/day in OT.

[adaMada]

Do you not remember black saterday (or was it sunday)?

I might be wrong. It could be more (or less) than 150 posts per thread. I don't remember the exact number. Even if the number is impossably high, it doesn't matter, because the arguement still stands... And we all know that the number isn't impossably high...

------------------
adaMada
adamada@springmail.com
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by adaMada (edited June 15, 2000).]</font>

[Alexander's Horse]

"The Threadjacking Appreciation Society (TAS) would like to applaud MarkG for his brave, if stupid, decision to restrict thread posting rights on the OT. This should give a new lease of life to our activities."

Posted on behalf of the Committee.



------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Topics (PROT)

Convenor of the Threadjacking Appreciation Society (new members welcome)

[Alexander's Horse]

Hey Squid! Can you let EVC know about this. Thanks.

[adaMada]

<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 adaMada on 06-15-2000 05:50 PM</font>
Do you not remember black saterday (or was it sunday)?

I might be wrong. It could be more (or less) than 150 posts per thread. I don't remember the exact number. Even if the number is impossably high, it doesn't matter, because the arguement still stands... And we all know that the number isn't impossably high...

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

Just defending myself before I'm shouted at--I understand that the bannings Black Saterday/Sunday wasn't about posting beyond the 150th post. I'm just reminding you what the subject of Ming's message was about.

------------------
adaMada
adamada@springmail.com

[Giant Squid]

Mark...if that's what you want, I suggest we have a "control" group. Tell everyone to email you just for the heck of it once a day. My guess is that you will get exactly as few emails, simply because it's inconvenient to email someone. If you actually CHECK the off-topic, you'll see that someone (I forget who is was, but it wasn't me or UEC) combined a thread about strawberries with one on nuclear power, because he could only do one thread. Did that person mail you? No. Did he have a legitimate complaint? Yes. The fact that you want to complicate things by adding this additional step simply proves that you want to manipulate the facts to ignore the obvious.