60 Second Rule

I realize this isn't a bug, but I don't really think it's a suggestion either (but JP'll probably look here first...), and is probably been implemented because of the recent problems with AntiOnline's server, but now we can only post every 60 seconds? Was there a problem with the original 20? I generally open 10-15 windows, scan through them, one-by-one, responding when I find somewhere where I can give good input. I lost posts already by clicking before my original 20 seconds were up, but now, with this 60 second rule in place, it seems that it'll take a lot longer for people to respond to messages because they will have to wait 60 seconds since their last post. I realize that this will prevent people from flooding the server with posts, but isn't there a middle ground we can find? Maybe 30 or 40 seconds? Just a thought...

AJ

I don't mind the time limit as long as it keeps the flooding down. Just my $0.02

I got nothing but time and it saves time overall with less flooding of the servers.

Sure don't want AO to get flooded and be offline or anything.

I'm similar to Avdven.
I'll open a bunch of windows and look through and then post tips or help as I go....

you must be a posting maniac AJ.. to need it in less than 60 sec's.. ;) :p

60 secs sounds good to me.. by the time i jump from one window to another, add somthing of interest and reread, then time up...


perhaps i'm just a slow reader ?

yeap 60 seconds is fine, stops annyoing script kiddies flooding the site

I would go a little lower, but nothing lower than 30 seconds. It would help when you have to make them quick edits to a post if you mis-typed, or noticed something wrong after you submited... As long as it would block floods and the accidental double submit. I think its all good.

/me This is really cool, cos of the flooding ****, also 60secs isn't a much time for people to wait, and also respond to messages.

Umm, there has always been a limit on how fast you can post. I beleve it was 40 seconds, but I don't remember right now. I know that I have seen the "error" page a few different times over the last few months saying the administrator has specified that you are only allowed to post evey xx seconds.

Then again, maybe JP just got sick of me posting......

There's no need to go below 60. You can always hold off pressing the 'submit' button for a little while, and it also helps prevent multiple posts, either intentional or otherwise.

I agree that there should *always* be a limit to prevent flooding, and multiple posts - as Terr pointed out - because the system has prevented me from accidently posting more than once because my browser and extremely slooow net connection failed to fetch the confirmation page and forward me to my post.

60 seconds seems a bit long to me, it depends really on whether you are used to writing long essays that you spend 5 minutes (or longer) composing, or whether you post short tips and share small bits of information.

For me, 60 seconds is pushing it a bit. The majority of internet users in the UK only have 56k modems at best, and we pay heavily for phone calls at the same time. This means that, unless we purchase a unmetered package, usually for £15+ per month, we are limited to the time we can spend online (because of the cost) and the speed at which we can surf. Forcing a whole minute between posts means that things are even more difficult for us hard-done by Brits. I'd prefer 20 - 30 seconds because that means I can go online, read a few threads, reply to anything interesting, and then disconnect before the phone bill starts mounting up.

30 seconds is likely to put off most flooders, although I personally prefered the old 20 seconds limit. Anything longer than 30 seconds is likely to start seriously annoying legitimate posters - hence this thread.

Greetings:

The purpose of the 60 second delay is to help prevent flooding and spamming.

Thread closed.