Limit users to 10 posts a day

[Wuppy]

It would be interesting to limit all users to a certain number of posts in each 24 hour period. Maybe 10, maybe 15, whatever the mods think best.

This would help encourage people to post more useful, relevant things rather than getting involved in endless flame wars.

This would also decrease the workload of the moderators because they would have fewer worthless, junky posts and personal attacks to remove.

If that seems too draconian, mods could limit the posting restriction to certain boards. For example, the "Pro Match Results," where people make running commentaries on the matches, could have unlimited posts per day.

Just a thought. I think it would make the boards a much better internet resource as it would (help) eliminate most of the worthless junk posts.

 

[Power Player]

You just showcased why you don't understand how a business succeeds on the internet.

Content is king, and moderators are here to decide what posts are "junky and worthless" - not you.

 

[Wuppy]

Aaaand.. I rest my case.

 

[Power Player]

You rest your case on that? LOL. So this thread was basically created to personally attack people. Ok, cool. Nice work.

Like I said, this site ranks extremely high on google for any tennis related search because of the content. If you limit people to 10 posts you just lose a ton of content and traffic. It's just simple logic that you don't really seem to grasp.

 

[Wuppy]

And this is where, in a typical TT thread, I would start making personal attacks back at you, and it would completely degenerate into name calling, as do the vast, vast majority of TT's threads.

This is beautiful, you're proving my point for me. I couldn't have asked for more.

I will address the minor point you have raised. "Content" might have been "king" a decade ago. Now, "relevant content" is king. Google's algorithm removes probably 99.9999% of TT's posts because they're worthless. If TT had a higher content-to-bullsh*t ratio, they would get more searches and more business, with less overhead.

Either way, we'll let the mods decide. I'm just throwing the idea out there. I do assume that people who have thousands upon thousands of posts will disagree

 

[Power Player]

The difference is that I have not attacked you in any way. I am just illustrating how you clearly do not understand the benefits of having a forum and why posts that you consider useless are not.

As for your point on relevant content, I sincerely doubt you work in the .com industry or really understand how complex google indexing is. Yes, relevant content is very important, but to say google removes 99.9% of TT's posts is 100% false and shows you have no idea on what you are talking about.

Furthermore it appears you are just making veiled attacks at posters like myself who have "thousands of posts" and have questioned your posts in the past.

To add, you already have close to 500 in only 3 months, so I doubt you should really be taking shots at anybody.

 

[mikeler]

FYI, you each have just 7 posts left for the rest of the day.

 

[Power Player]

Thanks Mikeler.

Darn it..now im down to 6.

 

[BobFL]

Wuppy, you need to talk to LeeD. You are in trouble, sorry.

 

[Bartelby]

Yes, I was once of the opinion that there should not be a minimum number of posts per day, but a minimum number of words - say 100 - per post to prevent posts that really contributed nothing further to the discussion.

I couldn't see this working in practice, but good threads can go for many pages without an interesting contribution and then they get hidden again.

The trouble with your suggestion ist that despite the fact we type, it really is just a conversation and hence posts can be as empty as most of them are.

 

[mikeler]

Yes, I was once of the opinion that there should not be a minimum number of posts per day, but a minimum number of words - say 100 - per post to prevent posts that really contributed nothing further to the discussion.

I couldn't see this working in practice, but good threads can go for many pages without an interesting contribution and then they get hidden again.

The trouble with your suggestion ist that despite the fact we type, it really is just a conversation and hence posts can be as empty as most of them are.

Interesting idea. I will admit that I almost always skip long posts and tend to read only the shorter ones unless it is a detailed string or racket review.

 

[woodrow1029]

Wuppy, you need to talk to LeeD. You are in trouble, sorry.

LOLOLOL... You get an extra free post for this one!

 

[Loose Cannon]

You just showcased why you don't understand how a business succeeds on the internet.

Content is king, and moderators are here to decide what posts are "junky and worthless" - not you.

Well damn....Power Play just double bageled Wuppy 0-0

 

[bad_call]

rollover?...cause sometimes i just can't be here.

 

[krz]

BreakPoint might commit suicide if this were to ever happen.

 

[purple-n-gold]

internets rule

 

[Rjtennis]

Wuppy, you need to talk to LeeD. You are in trouble, sorry.

I would be interested in hearing the back story to this if you are willing to share. Thanks.

 

[BobFL]

I would be interested in hearing the back story to this if you are willing to share. Thanks.

You too need to talk to LeeD. He'll tell you everything.

 

[mikeler]

Wuppy had 29 posts so far today. Thread fail!

 

[mad dog1]

Wuppy's posts are all full of valuable content.

"all polys feel the same"

"string companies need to provide cost to manufacture poly strings because they should only cost a few cents since it's just extruded plastic"

"string poly at 62#s"

"ball pocketing causes shots to launch long, therefore don't need the string bed to pocket the ball"

"hard to generate topspin w/ wilson racquet head shape"

"hit strokes by brushing the ball and not driving through the ball"

"anyone under a 4.5 using anything under a 100 sq in racquet is deluding himself"

"limit users to 10 posts a day"

etc...

 

[PrinceMoron]

FYI, you each have just 7 posts left for the rest of the day.

Funny!!!!!!

 

[Swissv2]

Wuppy shouldn't complain, he should take action, and therefore he should only post 10 relevant and intelligent threads per day.

 

[Sentinel]

BreakPoint might commit suicide if this were to ever happen.

actually limiting the # of posts will "protect" the "rankings" of the current "leaders".

So BP, suresh, Fedace etc should have no issues.


However, this will encourage some trolls to maintain multiple accounts so they can bypass these limits ( which they already do)

 

[joeri888]

If you actually did this, I wouldn't stick around. I often don't post for a few weeks, than come and post 100 posts in an hour and a half, just to voice my uninteresting opinion on all kinds of stuff. I won't call names or start flamewars, but I just like to be in the debate, not necessarily add value to it every single time.

 

[Korso]

If we could only reply 10 times a day than we would not bother reading posts like this one.

 

[ssonosk]

10 post per day would probably kill this forum.

Successful forums need those people that post all day.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

Free the Fanboys !!!

I originally thought the '10-per-day' limit might be a good idea, limiting the spaming, etc...

But then it dawned on me that from a reader's point of view, alimit would eliminate the entertaining fanboy flame war exchanges between the 'nads' & '****s'.

In addition, limiting a fanboy who just read a provocative, trolling new thread title about "his favorite pro" to only 10 posts per diem would push many of these psycho pillowbitters over the edge, lol ..... hell, you'd have to put half of 'em on suicide watch.

So in the interest of entertainment AND suicide prevention, I'm taking the 'low road' - no limits please.

 

[Korso]

I originally thought the '10-per-day' limit might be a good idea, limiting the spaming, etc...

But then it dawned on me that from a reader's point of view, alimit would eliminate the entertaining fanboy flame war exchanges between the 'nads' & '****s'.

In addition, limiting a fanboy who just read a provocative, trolling new thread title about "his favorite pro" to only 10 posts per diem would push many of these psycho pillowbitters over the edge, lol ..... hell, you'd have to put half of 'em on suicide watch.

So in the interest of entertainment AND suicide prevention, I'm taking the 'low road' - no limits please.

Ouch, thats a lot of drama. Maybe people are just killing time and do not like to watch tv.

 

[Sentinel]

If you actually did this, I wouldn't stick around. I often don't post for a few weeks, than come and post 100 posts in an hour and a half, just to voice my uninteresting opinion on all kinds of stuff. I won't call names or start flamewars, but I just like to be in the debate, not necessarily add value to it every single time.

Congrats Joeri on hitting 10k.

 

[Wikky]

If it wasn't for ridiculous arguments and over the top flamers I would never visit this site....

 

[zapvor]

what about by section? because the pro discussion is just ********.... i think 10 limit is good idea there

 

[Sentinel]

If it wasn't for ridiculous arguments and over the top flamers I would never visit this site....

NSK, Bullzie, Clarky ... *wink* *wink*

 

[hoodjem]

Aaaand.. I rest my case.

Now there's a profound, articulate post, worthy of raising Talk Tennis on Tennis Warehouse to the level of being an significant, useful, relevant resource for aficianados of the history of the game of tennis.

 

[tball]

I think a limit of 5 posts per thread will be very useful.

If you have anything useful to say, 5 posts will be plenty.

After 5 posts, threads tend to deviate and deteriorate anyway, no point in continuing anyhow.

 

[purge]

wrong approach imo. might aswell introduce a 10 gifs per day limit for senti while were at it

honestly just how silly would it be to actually have a reasonable discussion and then have to wait 24 hours to continue because you reached your post per day limit :S and thats all it would really do because the actual spammers WILL find a way past this anyhow

 

[fortun8son]

This just silly. The idiots eventually get banned and their posts deleted.
This is a discussion. Some of us like to discuss and, maybe, have some fun.

 

[CLL]

Forums are meant to have communication.

I feel that limiting the amount of times you may post in a day would inhibit good drawn out debates and discussions...


But then again people can always create multiple accounts to bypass this.

Just my two cents.

 

[retlod]

This much discussion in a Wuppy thread?

 

[Zarfot Z]

This would help encourage people to post more useful, relevant things rather than getting involved in endless flame wars.

Wuppy's posts are all full of valuable content.

"all polys feel the same"

"string companies need to provide cost to manufacture poly strings because they should only cost a few cents since it's just extruded plastic"

"string poly at 62#s"

"ball pocketing causes shots to launch long, therefore don't need the string bed to pocket the ball"

"hard to generate topspin w/ wilson racquet head shape"

"hit strokes by brushing the ball and not driving through the ball"

"anyone under a 4.5 using anything under a 100 sq in racquet is deluding himself"

"limit users to 10 posts a day"

etc...

The irony is stunning.

 

[mightyrick]

It would be interesting to limit all users to a certain number of posts in each 24 hour period. Maybe 10, maybe 15, whatever the mods think best.

This would help encourage people to post more useful, relevant things rather than getting involved in endless flame wars.

This would also decrease the workload of the moderators because they would have fewer worthless, junky posts and personal attacks to remove.

If that seems too draconian, mods could limit the posting restriction to certain boards. For example, the "Pro Match Results," where people make running commentaries on the matches, could have unlimited posts per day.

Just a thought. I think it would make the boards a much better internet resource as it would (help) eliminate most of the worthless junk posts.

Here's where choice comes in.

If there's a particular forum section that you think is junky, then don't read it. If there are certain posters who you think are basically spam robots and trolls, then put them on your ignore list.

Once you utilize your ignore list and just stick to certain forum sections, you'd be surprised how much it cleans up your experience.

 

[jorel]

FYI, you each have just 7 posts left for the rest of the day.

classic..........

 

[TigerTim]

Stupid stupid idea. Next.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

Terrible idea.

 

[hoodjem]

Wuppy's posts are all full of valuable content.

"all polys feel the same"

"string companies need to provide cost to manufacture poly strings because they should only cost a few cents since it's just extruded plastic"

"string poly at 62#s"

"ball pocketing causes shots to launch long, therefore don't need the string bed to pocket the ball"

"hard to generate topspin w/ wilson racquet head shape"

"hit strokes by brushing the ball and not driving through the ball"

"anyone under a 4.5 using anything under a 100 sq in racquet is deluding himself"

"limit users to 10 posts a day"

etc...

Deep arguments.

 

[BTURNER]

I read plenty of posters who are not remotely stale or uninteresting after 10 posts. Often they are dividing their energy into three or four threads or answering questions. I can pick who I want to read, without anyone else determining how often I ought to read them. Thanks but I don't need a mother in here to ration me as a reader or poster.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Would there be piped in cricket sounds when waiting for the next awesome post to show up??? That might work... (/sarcasm)

@Wuppy, fellow So Cal'er - channel your energies to something we need fixing; ***clowns driving slow in the fast lane on the 405!

 

[TheCheese]

What a terrible idea.

 

[Bartelby]

It would indeed be a good idea if people posted only when they had something modestly useful to say.

 

[HRB]

It would be interesting to limit all users to a certain number of posts in each 24 hour period. Maybe 10, maybe 15, whatever the mods think best.

This would help encourage people to post more useful, relevant things rather than getting involved in endless flame wars.

This would also decrease the workload of the moderators because they would have fewer worthless, junky posts and personal attacks to remove.

If that seems too draconian, mods could limit the posting restriction to certain boards. For example, the "Pro Match Results," where people make running commentaries on the matches, could have unlimited posts per day.

Just a thought. I think it would make the boards a much better internet resource as it would (help) eliminate most of the worthless junk posts.

Wow...well thought out..but here is how I read it..."I'm a pompous D-Bag"..nuff said. Be sure to look up your post and find these pearls of wisdom you were kind enough to grace us with..ROTFLMAO!

 

[Readers]

1, Clicked on the thread.

2, See that OP is on my ignore list.

3, Happy about that decision.