REALLY think we should have a post limit on creating threads

[StepBack3]

Or at least in the G.E forum.

I mean god damn, some of most over used, repetitive, pointless threads are being made by users with as little as 2 posts to like 100.

Some people are literally making usernames just to make a thread hoping it will get multiple pages.
It's an attention seeking thing for most of them.

[LittleOzzy]

A post limit simply creates post padding.

Personally it's a lot easier to ignore one stupid thread over 100 stupid posts until they reach the limit.

[StepBack3]

True enough.

A solution for that would be to create an in between post limit. One high enough to where someone likely couldn't reach it in 1 day even with spam (50-100+??) which would likely stop people from attempting spam because it will become noticeable and tiresome and instead continue to come back and casual post knowing they will reach the limit eventually rather then quickly posting a thread and then don't post again for a week.

Probably just me. I really think it would clean up so many of these threads that reach 3 pages of the same stuff from a thread a day ago.. then rinse and repeat, ugh.

[Howard Mass]

A post limit simply creates post padding.

Personally it's a lot easier to ignore one stupid thread over 100 stupid posts until they reach the limit.

OZ,

Well said!

StepBack: If someone did that, there bad posts would stick out but do appreciate the suggestion.

[ChicagoStrong]

There should at least be a posting quota on the General Board.

[vincecarter4pres]

How about not being allowed to post on the GB period until you have say at least 250 posts?

[darth_federer]

Why? If theres a bad post just report it and move on. That place has tons of mods. Somebody should be online almost all the time.

[Howard Mass]

If we go with anything on the General NBA Forum, it will be a time limit not a post limit as users would just make a lot of bad posts.

We are looking into this option.

[BIGGIEsmalls 23]

I suggested the following in one of our Bulls threads regarding a similar topic:

Maybe create a "rookie" board where newer posters on that board will create their own threads & have their own debates separate from veteran posters. Maybe have several designated veteran posters interact on that board, as well. Those designated veterans can serve as "instructors" by typing quality posts for the "rookies" to view & learn. The veterans could also comment on the "rookies" posts, which would give the "rookie" an idea of how back & forth debates occur on the "REAL" board.

The "rookies" posts can be graded according to quality. Example: Rookie A posts "Lebron is an a**hole" would receive a "F" grade for that post, Rookie B posts "Rose is a better PG than CP3 because his stats are better in the area of..........." would receive a "B" grade for that post. This will give you power to eliminate post-padding.

Let the rookies "graduate" to the "REAL" boards when a) they have enough quality posts...or b) the Mods feel that they're ready to graduate via their grading system. You can have "unbiased" Mods keep some type of tracking system regarding the "rookie's" quality posts, behavior, etc.... Once the "rookie" has graduated, designate a color for their username so that the Mods are better aware of them once they're integrated into the "REAL" board.

I just offer this idea as a beginning model, but I'm sure that it could be tweaked to fit what you're trying to accomplish.

[-Kees-]

I like that idea a lot, but I doubt the admin go for it simply because it separates posters based on forced criteria, and I doubt they do that. Having a time limit would also be great (as HoMa mentioned a few posts back), and honestly, BIGGIEsmalls 23 idea seems like the best (even though I don't see them going for it.)

[Howard Mass]

I chatted with our contractor Thursday and we are working on some remedies.

[RIPskaterdude]

Grading posts would be tough to do; some people would vote against someone's post just because they disagreed with them. The easiest solution is not to allow people to start a new thread within a simple time frame from when they first joined. Unfortunately, with any free forum, you are going to deal with spam and people who are just starting threads to get a negative reaction, but hopefully a step can be made in the right direction for everyone.

[Howard Mass]

Skaterdude,

We are considering all of these factors.

I can see these problems if we have a grading system. We will probably start with a Like or plus 1 button.

On the new users, that is something that is in the cards.

I'll probably know more next week.

[JoseRizal]

I think one suggestion would be to evaluate a member's posts prior to awarding him access to creating topics.

He would then have to request for it based on pre-determined merits prior to grant. I'm not sure if this is feasible system-wise, but it would definitely limit irrational, repetitive & senseless topics in the GB.

At the end of the day, it's the quality of posts and not the quantity that matters...

[Howard Mass]

It is an option but more than likely, it will be a time option as a post one would lead to too much post-padding.

[NyCeEvO]

What if it could be set as an either/or function?

For example, you either have to have 1000 posts or be a member for 100 days before you can create threads, and whichever benchmark you reach first, you'll be able to create threads at that time.

A time threshold would not be good for people who post frequently and yet still make high-quality posts. We can trust these people with using the GB and most other threads responsibly.

At the same time, only having a post count threshold could motivate a lot of trolls to make bad posts frequently just to reach the threshold. However, if the bar is set at 1000 or so, mods can catch them and others can report them for just making irrelevant one-word/one sentence comments.

Having the either/or threshold would reward people who make high-quality/non-troll posts frequently by getting them access to create threads instead of waiting for a time period to elapse, while at the same time, the post-count requirement would keep trolls from instantly creating threads and if people try to reach it by stat padding, they can be reprimanded for doing so.

[Howard Mass]

It's possible some people could get priviledges earlier.

Were still figuring out how were going to implement this.

[darth_federer]

At Hfboards they have a thing where mods/admins must approve your first few threads before they are posted. This is done until you have a certain number of posts or if you are verified as a good user.

Maybe something like that would work.

[Howard Mass]

Darth,

That is possible but we have a very large forum and am not sure we would have the time to do that.

[BIGGIEsmalls 23]

It's possible some people could get priviledges earlier.

Were still figuring out how were going to implement this.

I gave you the blueprint on page 1, Mr. Mass .

Don't worry man, I'm not looking to get back any royalties for the idea .