Threads Per Week Limit.
- Thread starter JimJimmers
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
U
As an overall idea i disagree.
But, because i can think of at least 3 people that are guilty of this, i think it may be needed, even though i don't like it. This isn't Twitter, we don't need to know every thought you have, how many posts you've made, or what random non-sense thought just popped into your head. A good post is not one where you sit there, look around your room, spy an object and decide to write a post asking others about them. Nor 15 conspiracy theory posts a day. So yeah, lets cut these people off at the knee's.
But, because i can think of at least 3 people that are guilty of this, i think it may be needed, even though i don't like it. This isn't Twitter, we don't need to know every thought you have, how many posts you've made, or what random non-sense thought just popped into your head. A good post is not one where you sit there, look around your room, spy an object and decide to write a post asking others about them. Nor 15 conspiracy theory posts a day. So yeah, lets cut these people off at the knee's.
Hmmm, I think it would be better with a limit per week rather than per day since several users that I can think of may post a handful great threads in a day, and then none for a week or more. Either that or do a limit per day of three or four to allow those who aren't chronic thread creators to create a few at the same time, but still cap it at ten per week to keep the chronic thread creators from maxing out every day and still have them flooding the forum.
G
I personally don't believe that this is the proper solution -- it is not too unlike making 99.99% of the people "pre-pay" for their gasoline because 0.01% of the people are in the habit of driving away from the pump without paying... (Please notice that I did not say '100%' - because 0.01% DO NOT PAY - think about it...)
However - if the admins do decide to do something like this -- I would suggest something like - one new thread per forum per day - if not 6 hours - would be a better balance of things...
I think that any truly good solution is strictly going to somehow "target" only those people who "abuse" - and limit the thread-starting ability of only those people.
How about this...
On the initial post (only) of a thread - along with the 'Like' option - place also a 'this-thread-is-useless-it-should-have-not-been-created' type of ['Do-Not-Like'] option. It is only valid for any member who does not post to the thread -- and only until a certain number of posts have been added to it and/or a certain number of days has passed. If you post to the thread, you "loose your vote" (for that thread) where this issue is concerned. After post-count and/or days-passed runs out - nobody can "vote"...
A certain number of clicks (by different people) on this option sets into motion the following:
~ Each person starts out with a 'reserve' number (i.e., N=10; N is, of course, whatever number would be decided by RoboOp -- I am using '10' as an example).
~ If ten [different] people click on the option, the thread-starter's 'reserve' count goes down to 9 - and they must now wait 24 hours before they are allowed to start another thread.
~ Next time only 9 people have to click the option, and it decrements to 8. And the person has to wait 48 hours.
~ and so on... (wait time = N - <member 'reserve' count>, in 24-hour increments)
~ CUMULATIVE WAIT TIME FROM MULTIPLE THREADS
~ If a person's count reaches '0' - the admins get an automated message informing them of it - and they look into it and do whatever is decided beforehand to do when this happens...
~ Every person's number increments by '1' every N days - up to N (never more than N).
~ Anything along the lines of - abuse by a group of people who "maliciously gang-up on" someone to force their 'reserve' count down, or etc. - would be handled by the admins like any other "unjust" action that someone might do on the site.
~ admins would "reserve the right" to make "corrections" to member 'reserve' counts (up or down) in any situation where they felt it was warranted.
"Something like that..."
Just something to think about...
.
However - if the admins do decide to do something like this -- I would suggest something like - one new thread per forum per day - if not 6 hours - would be a better balance of things...
I think that any truly good solution is strictly going to somehow "target" only those people who "abuse" - and limit the thread-starting ability of only those people.
How about this...
On the initial post (only) of a thread - along with the 'Like' option - place also a 'this-thread-is-useless-it-should-have-not-been-created' type of ['Do-Not-Like'] option. It is only valid for any member who does not post to the thread -- and only until a certain number of posts have been added to it and/or a certain number of days has passed. If you post to the thread, you "loose your vote" (for that thread) where this issue is concerned. After post-count and/or days-passed runs out - nobody can "vote"...
A certain number of clicks (by different people) on this option sets into motion the following:
~ Each person starts out with a 'reserve' number (i.e., N=10; N is, of course, whatever number would be decided by RoboOp -- I am using '10' as an example).
~ If ten [different] people click on the option, the thread-starter's 'reserve' count goes down to 9 - and they must now wait 24 hours before they are allowed to start another thread.
~ Next time only 9 people have to click the option, and it decrements to 8. And the person has to wait 48 hours.
~ and so on... (wait time = N - <member 'reserve' count>, in 24-hour increments)
~ CUMULATIVE WAIT TIME FROM MULTIPLE THREADS
~ If a person's count reaches '0' - the admins get an automated message informing them of it - and they look into it and do whatever is decided beforehand to do when this happens...
~ Every person's number increments by '1' every N days - up to N (never more than N).
~ Anything along the lines of - abuse by a group of people who "maliciously gang-up on" someone to force their 'reserve' count down, or etc. - would be handled by the admins like any other "unjust" action that someone might do on the site.
~ admins would "reserve the right" to make "corrections" to member 'reserve' counts (up or down) in any situation where they felt it was warranted.
"Something like that..."
Just something to think about...
.
G
Don't think about my last post too long -- I really only made the suggestion to get you thinking...
And the point is -- "it would take a complex solution for a complex problem" -- these things are never simple.
While I certainly DO understand the "vexation" of the issue -- I do not believe that "a change in the system" is in order...
One of the things that is severely wrong in the U.S.A. is that - "all it takes is for one bad 'incident' to occur, and everybody suddenly wants a new law" --- this is rarely ever the proper solution.
Instead of trying to come up with a "new law" (to regulate - and complicate - things), what if we were to simply combine just-the-right-amount of brotherly love with just-the-right-amount of admonishment to come up with just-the-right-amount of balance between "niceness" and "sternness"...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
YOU PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THIS...
YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
STOP IT!!!!!
See - that wasn't so hard, now was it...?
"Let's find a way to use what we already have in place to come up with a solution."
"It is a people problem. Let's find a people solution. Technology is helpful, but - it is not always where the solution lies..."
.
And the point is -- "it would take a complex solution for a complex problem" -- these things are never simple.
While I certainly DO understand the "vexation" of the issue -- I do not believe that "a change in the system" is in order...
One of the things that is severely wrong in the U.S.A. is that - "all it takes is for one bad 'incident' to occur, and everybody suddenly wants a new law" --- this is rarely ever the proper solution.
Instead of trying to come up with a "new law" (to regulate - and complicate - things), what if we were to simply combine just-the-right-amount of brotherly love with just-the-right-amount of admonishment to come up with just-the-right-amount of balance between "niceness" and "sternness"...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
YOU PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THIS...
YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
STOP IT!!!!!
See - that wasn't so hard, now was it...?
"Let's find a way to use what we already have in place to come up with a solution."
"It is a people problem. Let's find a people solution. Technology is helpful, but - it is not always where the solution lies..."
.
U
The point is that people who post too much, and flood forum areas are also pushing more valid posts off the page and all that remains is a forum full of useless posts. So its more than a simple matter of ignoring them, because they are effecting other posts just by their existence. Misc forums is notorious for this, as two people tend to overtake the forum with one pointless post after another til all thats left on the front page is their posts about nothing.
It's about starting threads, not posting on previously started threads.
Besides, you can just skim through those too.
You can get the gist usually in the first sentence or two.
Besides, counting posts and turning off your account after so many per week would
make running the site a financial impossibility.
Besides, you can just skim through those too.
You can get the gist usually in the first sentence or two.
Besides, counting posts and turning off your account after so many per week would
make running the site a financial impossibility.
W
I agree there is too much of it, but sometimes people need something that is not debating. (Maybe we should just remove the old threads and make one huge "be random here " thread, that way it wouldn't take up as much space in the forums.)
PS:I cannot resist asking (I assume you have seen enough of me to know I mean no harm by asking)
What makes something "valid"?
I find many of the bible discussions topics no more relevant than the misc posts
U
I agree there is too much of it, but sometimes people need something that is not debating. (Maybe we should just remove the old threads and make one huge "be random here " thread, that way it wouldn't take up as much space in the forums.)
PS:I cannot resist asking (I assume you have seen enough of me to know I mean no harm by asking)
What makes something "valid"?
I find many of the bible discussions topics no more relevant than the misc posts
PS:I cannot resist asking (I assume you have seen enough of me to know I mean no harm by asking)
What makes something "valid"?
I find many of the bible discussions topics no more relevant than the misc posts
Lets see, irrelevant topics would be things like creating a thread just to announce how many posts you've made and doing this repeatedly, creating a new thread every few days to countdown to a holiday or event day. I mean its obvious some people are sitting at their computer, daily, bored out of their minds, and just post whatever random concept, statement, thought or question comes to mind. Not because they're of interest, or even fun, but because this person seems to have nothing else going on in their life. Like i said, this isn't Twitter, i don't need to know every time someones in a good mood, or had a BM, or whatever.
You know, they sit there, see a fish bowl and decide to post about fish bowls. Then they look at the glass and decide to post about drinks. Things like that are just the clogging posts.
V
Or maybe, just limiting the newcomers to 20 post a week for a couple of weeks, just to weed out the trouble makers. And then, once they've been here a couple of weeks, give them unlimited access. Or better yet, instead of the newcomers, limit the offenders to 5 a week for a couple of weeks. Either they'll stop completely, leave, or if they start up again, then further the limit by a month. Or, for these same suspected spammers, put them on a probation period, where every post they submit has to be approved before others can see it.
Last edited: