PDA

View Full Version : 73 Second Rule


xghstx
10-28-2008, 08:34 PM
Can we get rid of that please? It's a pain. Maybe just lowered a bit to like 30 or something. Thanks.

edit: Fuck! This forum requires that you wait 73 seconds between posts. Please try again in 29 seconds.

This forum requires that you wait 73 seconds between posts. Please try again in 5 seconds.
clif
10-28-2008, 08:59 PM
73 ftl. butttttttt that might cause problems because some people would do like 15 in a row and make somb slow as balls
GnipGnop
10-28-2008, 09:28 PM
all it did for me was increase the amount of time I spend on here. :(
If it was lower, I'd swing by, lay down a couple posts and be on my merry way.
skimmer-x
10-29-2008, 05:32 AM
73 second rule is the devil.
RexSkimmer
10-29-2008, 11:18 AM
it should be relative to how retarded your posts are

more retarded = longer you have to wait
LuckyBuMmRa
10-29-2008, 12:12 PM
nick's wait would have been like 24 hours.
zeus
10-29-2008, 01:12 PM
have it in proportion to rep. high rep=low time
lil chuck
10-29-2008, 01:43 PM
thats a good idea

73 seconds should be the starting time for new people
clif
10-29-2008, 01:50 PM
nick's wait would have been like 24 hours.


we dont speak of that anymore. shhhhhh
lil chuck
10-29-2008, 02:01 PM
his name on skimonline=voldomorts name in harry potter?
zeus
10-29-2008, 02:09 PM
or like bomb on a plane
narwhal
10-29-2008, 02:17 PM
73 second rule is the devil.

Frank Hastings is the devil.
xghstx
10-29-2008, 04:58 PM
I think the idea to correlate the wait time with rep is a good one. Keeps the newbs from spamming and allows the more senior members to have shorter waits.

Maybe the correlation could be with post count. That would likely work too.
skimmer-x
10-29-2008, 05:44 PM
Frank Hastings is the devil.

Truth
derc a der
10-29-2008, 09:46 PM
it should be relative to how retarded your posts are

more retarded = longer you have to wait
agreed.
ken dog
10-30-2008, 12:48 AM
agreed.
ftl
Ammy
10-30-2008, 04:22 AM
73 second rule is the devil.

And another...

Edit: I asked AP about this a while ago and he said it was probably never going to change. I asked in regards to posting pictures and he made the point that it is about 12 minutes to post 40 photos, which isn't a lot when you think about it though. I do agree though, it gets annoying.
SA Crew
10-30-2008, 05:17 AM
Mines 9 second!
Gehrig
10-30-2008, 07:49 AM
73 seconds discourages people from just posting really fast just to get their count up.













nick
xghstx
10-30-2008, 04:39 PM
I propose:

<1000 posts - 73 sec
1000 - 1999 - 60 sec
2000 - 2999 - 45 sec
3000 + - 30 sec

I think 30 seconds is long enough that it will keep people from posting too rapidly but is also far more reasonable than the current 73.
Noodles
10-30-2008, 07:25 PM
Are these propositions even possible?
Jaleez
10-30-2008, 08:52 PM
I hate the rule too, i think lowering it to 30 would be better


I propose:

<1000 posts - 73 sec
1000 - 1999 - 60 sec
2000 - 2999 - 45 sec
3000 + - 30 sec

I think 30 seconds is long enough that it will keep people from posting too rapidly but is also far more reasonable than the current 73.


that would be perfect

us 3000+ people know how to post haha
Indy
10-31-2008, 04:12 AM
dont we jaleez, dont we?
xghstx
11-01-2008, 10:54 AM
I vote Jaleez as a mod and then she can change the rule. :D
clif
11-01-2008, 08:27 PM
make it over 9000 seconds for ken dog
LiveToSkim
11-02-2008, 09:19 AM
i always wondered why 73? such a random fucking number...
xghstx
11-03-2008, 05:14 PM
it used to be lower but Peluso changed it to 73 for some reason. i forget why.
GnipGnop
11-03-2008, 05:39 PM
hard night of zima and triscuits.
benmasters
11-16-2008, 10:09 PM
This forum requires that you wait 37 seconds between posts. Please try again in 10 seconds.

changed?
Derek Makekau
11-16-2008, 10:18 PM
repost.