Scratch

cheddargirl wrote:

a1130 wrote:

scimonster wrote:

I am so not suggesting we have a character limit!
Anyways, the spammers often have a full post of spam. D:

What about a captcha? Like this:

"Enter the following characters"-http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … ymbols.gif

This can be a test to see if the user is a human or a spambot.

Anyone approve? 

I would... but the problem is that we have more human spammers on Scratch than bot ones.

The 60 second rule can be annoying, but a lot of forums have a 60 second rule in place as a default for normal users for probably for similar [if not the same] reasons why it is in place here. I see little to no one complaining on other forums with that same rule, everyone else just waits until a few seconds have passed until the 60 second rule is finally lifted.

Unless it's the TBG forums where rapid posting might be an issue, a 60 second rule isn't so bad. Just take the time out to check out something else [like looking through a Scratch project!  ] to pass the few seconds that are left.

Well, the TBGs do get tons of posts a day... (That reminds me, I should go play some TBGs!)

soupoftomato wrote:

Im probably repeating what was said LONG ago, but nobody can convince them to change it. It does it's job and if it doesn't take you 60 second to write your post then you either type fast, or don't type enough.

Why don't you go back to your "collab" with Jack? (That reminds me, I should check up on the Super Smash Bros. Scratch forum...)

ElectricSparx wrote:

Musicstar888 wrote:

ElectricSparx wrote:

What I meant was: New Scratchers can have a 60 second rule, and Scratchers can have a 30 second rule.

New Scratchers obviously won't know the Scratch Forums well, but I don't think that we should make them wait any longer than us just because they're new. I mean, there could be Scratchers out there that have been around for a long time, and maybe they've spammed before. I don't really think that is fair. Everyone should have the amount of time to wait.

New Scratchers could get the 60 second rule.

New Scratchers have what I believe is a 500-second rule. Not entirely sure, though, and I'm too lazy to check. 

The 60-second rule is staying whether or not you like it: it serves a greater purpose than to prevent spam. Say my non-existent brother got really mad at me one day and as punishment decided he'd start flaming me on the forums. If he could post as much as he wanted, and there were no moderators online at the time, it'd take forever to clean up the mess he'd made! But, with the sixty-second-rule, we'd only have to clean up a significantly smaller portion of posts.    So, it's got some uses against flaming, too, which everyone, including full-fledged Scratchers are susceptible to.

Harakou wrote:

coolstuff wrote:

ElectricSparx wrote:

New Scratchers could get the 60 second rule.

New Scratchers have what I believe is a 500-second rule. Not entirely sure, though, and I'm too lazy to check. 

The 60-second rule is staying whether or not you like it: it serves a greater purpose than to prevent spam. Say my non-existent brother got really mad at me one day and as punishment decided he'd start flaming me on the forums. If he could post as much as he wanted, and there were no moderators online at the time, it'd take forever to clean up the mess he'd made! But, with the sixty-second-rule, we'd only have to clean up a significantly smaller portion of posts.    So, it's got some uses against flaming, too, which everyone, including full-fledged Scratchers are susceptible to.

It's 180 seconds now, I believe.

And like the other posters have said, the 60 second rule is here to stay. It gives the mods a lot less to have to clean up if someone decides to start spamming or a flame war breaks out. I honestly don't see why it bothers people except for maybe on the TBG's forum either; I rarely run into it.

Well said, Harakou! You're set to be a mod now. 

I never run into it, either, but it doesn't apply to me. 

ElectricSparx wrote:

coolstuff wrote:

ElectricSparx wrote:

New Scratchers could get the 60 second rule.

New Scratchers have what I believe is a 500-second rule. Not entirely sure, though, and I'm too lazy to check. 

The 60-second rule is staying whether or not you like it: it serves a greater purpose than to prevent spam. Say my non-existent brother got really mad at me one day and as punishment decided he'd start flaming me on the forums. If he could post as much as he wanted, and there were no moderators online at the time, it'd take forever to clean up the mess he'd made! But, with the sixty-second-rule, we'd only have to clean up a significantly smaller portion of posts.    So, it's got some uses against flaming, too, which everyone, including full-fledged Scratchers are susceptible to.

Lazy Moderators get the 1,000,000 second rule. 

Even us moderators need rest! And, hey, we do have lives outside Scratch. 

It should stay.

legorulez101 wrote:

bananaman114 wrote:

legorulez101 wrote:

I agree!
Let's turn this into a petition!

No. Just no.

Yes. Just yes.

You can try as hard as you want, but I'm pretty sure it won't get you anywhere.  Personally, I don't have a problem with the 60-second rule.  Besides, I don't think your uprising would become inclusive of enough people to make a difference.  A LOT of people use Scratch.  Even in this forum post, there is still a lot of controversy over whether the 60-second rule should be changed.  How many more people throughout the rest of the Scratch forum community do you think are still perfectly fine with it?  I think there would be a lot of them, and I doubt the rule is a problem for most people.  If the rule was really a problem, it would have been changed a long time ago, or this uprising would have been stifled instantly.

Seriously, I often have a huge queue of tabs.  it doesn't take that long to respond to simple questions, and sometimes even long ones.  @scratch team, make it 30 seconds, on the condition that people stop complaining, and announce that it will never be shortened again.  Maybe 30 seconds for active for a year accounts?

coolstuff wrote:

ElectricSparx wrote:

coolstuff wrote:

New Scratchers have what I believe is a 500-second rule. Not entirely sure, though, and I'm too lazy to check. 

The 60-second rule is staying whether or not you like it: it serves a greater purpose than to prevent spam. Say my non-existent brother got really mad at me one day and as punishment decided he'd start flaming me on the forums. If he could post as much as he wanted, and there were no moderators online at the time, it'd take forever to clean up the mess he'd made! But, with the sixty-second-rule, we'd only have to clean up a significantly smaller portion of posts.    So, it's got some uses against flaming, too, which everyone, including full-fledged Scratchers are susceptible to.

Lazy Moderators get the 1,000,000 second rule. 

Even us moderators need rest! And, hey, we do have lives outside Scratch. 

I know, I was just cracking a joke. 

mulus_equum_amat wrote:

legorulez101 wrote:

bananaman114 wrote:

No. Just no.

Yes. Just yes.

You can try as hard as you want, but I'm pretty sure it won't get you anywhere.  Personally, I don't have a problem with the 60-second rule.  Besides, I don't think your uprising would become inclusive of enough people to make a difference.  A LOT of people use Scratch.  Even in this forum post, there is still a lot of controversy over whether the 60-second rule should be changed.  How many more people throughout the rest of the Scratch forum community do you think are still perfectly fine with it?  I think there would be a lot of them, and I doubt the rule is a problem for most people.  If the rule was really a problem, it would have been changed a long time ago, or this uprising would have been stifled instantly.

There is quite a bit rapid posting, so lowering the bar on the time limit would certainly be good.

a1130 wrote:

@LiquidMetal That's true- we still need a time limit- this can save the moderators a LOT of time and prevent spam. However, it CAN be shorter, e.g. 30 seconds. I'm pretty sure that will stop people from complaining AND spamming.

The complaining, yes.

The spamming, though, I doubt it. There are cases where the 60 time limit has helped in reducing spam. 

a1130 wrote:

@LiquidMetal That's true- we still need a time limit- this can save the moderators a LOT of time and prevent spam. However, it CAN be shorter, e.g. 30 seconds. I'm pretty sure that will stop people from complaining AND spamming.

Good idea.