Mountain Project Logo

Limits on Forum Posts?

M Sprague · · New England · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 5,090
Nick Mardi wrote: I think by doing this you're going to stifle some good conversation. If there are people that are causing a problem they should be removed from the forums. Instead of instituting posting limitations why not make a 3 strike policy? Start with a 30 day ban, then a 60 day, then permanent. I don't see how enforcing this would be too difficult, the people that need to be removed are pretty obvious.
Seriously, how many good postings would we lose with a 10 per day limit. Not many I would think. I don't think a reasonable limit would stifle any good conversation, and certainly not more than being swamped with nonsense. I think that keeps many from bothering to join in.

I agree, unfortunately, the ban hammer needs to be used more often.
Jeremy Hand · · Northern VA · Joined Feb 2012 · Points: 100

I like the concept but think you would be hindering the community as well... I throw in some trollish remarks everyonce in awhile but I also like interesting debate and, occasionally, I try to be helpful.

What happens when someone new joins or someone is looking for some serious information and the someone that can be of some assistance has already reached their daily limit? You haven't only hampered the members ability to respond to a person in need but you may also drive away the OP by tricking him/her into thinking that their thread wasn't worthwhile or the community just doesn't give a shit.

So, while you will effectively remove the majority of trolling,, and what some people see as pointless bickering, you will also be hampering the entire forum. As others have said, this is the internet. You are not forced to read every post in every thread every day. You can decide to just read the OP and respond to it. You, the user behind the keyboard, has complete control of everything you see and contribute to. If I see a thread titled, Pixie dust chalk recipe that lights up holds and it has 28 pages worth of commentary I will make the conscious decision to ignore that thread. To police the entire community because some people are enticed into reading something which results in them getting butt hurt is not reputable, respectable, or fair.

On the other hand - BANNING particular members over repeated disrespectful/ignorant/disgusting remarks is completely fair, as they would be proving their complete disregard for Rule #1 over a long period of time. But only ban once they've been warned 2 or 3 times and don't allow all mods have this power... only a small handful of people (otherwise it WILL be abused).

Or everyone can stfu and get over it. Damn nancies!

NickinCO · · colorado · Joined Sep 2010 · Points: 155
M Sprague wrote: Seriously, how many good postings would we lose with a 10 per day limit. Not many I would think. I don't think a reasonable limit would stifle any good conversation, and certainly not more than being swamped with nonsense. I think that keeps many from bothering to join in. I agree, unfortunately, the ban hammer needs to be used more often.
You're probably right, I think putting a post limit on the forums though is like putting a band-aid on a cut that isn't going to go heal. Certain people will feel like they're being over-moderated and may be likely to leave (or at least whine about it), and others may limit contributions which might not necessarily be a bad thing.

Would the post limit only be applied to the forums or on route comments also?

I still think it would be easier to just remove the bad apples. An IP ban for 30 days and then a permanent boot.

I disagree without everyone who says "it's just the internet" too. The administrators have put a lot of hardwork into this site and there's no reason they should have to tolerate the bs. Contrary to what a lot of people want to think, freedom of speech isn't free here, it's a dictatorship run by the creators, that's the way it should be... they put in all the work and pay the bills unless everyone here but me is paying for bandwidth?
David Appelhans · · Broomfield, CO · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 410

I like the concept but think you would be hindering the community as well... I throw in some trollish remarks everyonce in awhile but I also like interesting debate and, occasionally, I try to be helpful.

What happens when someone new joins or someone is looking for some serious information and the someone that can be of some assistance has already reached their daily limit? You haven't only hampered the members ability to respond to a person in need but you may also drive away the OP by tricking him/her into thinking that their thread wasn't worthwhile or the community just doesn't give a shit.

It sounds like you don't troll enough that you would be using up 10 or 15 posts a day. When was the last time elanor had something useful to contribute? I doubt Burt will ever be on the verge of saying something helpful and then go "shoot, I'm out of my 10 posts for the day."

Glenn Schuler · · Monument, Co. · Joined Jun 2006 · Points: 1,330
Nick Mardi wrote: I still think it would be easier to just remove the bad apples. An IP ban for 30 days and then a permanent boot.
This^

My vote is no post limits.
TresSki Roach · · Santa Fe, NM · Joined May 2002 · Points: 605

Personally I don't think it is necessary. Some of the offender's posts are actually kinda funny. It's pretty easy to skip right over someone's posts if you don't want to read them. How about an ignore button instead? I think rc.com had something like that. It completely hides that person's posts from your view if you hit "ignore". Or a button where you can block someone all together. I think 14ers.com has that feature. I'm not sure. I've only been blocked but never blocked anyone so I have no clue. Just some thoughts. I think it would be a detriment to the community if you limit posts.

Or what Glenn and Nick said works well too. Give a warning. . .then. . .

Jeremy Hand · · Northern VA · Joined Feb 2012 · Points: 100
David Appelhans wrote:I like the concept but think you would be hindering the community as well... I throw in some trollish remarks everyonce in awhile but I also like interesting debate and, occasionally, I try to be helpful. What happens when someone new joins or someone is looking for some serious information and the someone that can be of some assistance has already reached their daily limit? You haven't only hampered the members ability to respond to a person in need but you may also drive away the OP by tricking him/her into thinking that their thread wasn't worthwhile or the community just doesn't give a shit. It sounds like you don't troll enough that you would be using up 10 or 15 posts a day. When was the last time elanor had something useful to contribute? I doubt Burt will ever be on the verge of saying something helpful and then go "shoot, I'm out of my 10 posts for the day."
So take out the individuals and save the community from too much regulation.
Red · · Tacoma, Toyota · Joined Sep 2008 · Points: 1,625
Nick Mardi wrote: I still think it would be easier to just remove the bad apples. An IP ban for 30 days and then a permanent boot.
+1
Steven Bishop · · Denver, CO · Joined Jul 2010 · Points: 125

YES YES YES
+1,000

kirkadirka wrote:Its easy to avoid the threads that are polluted if one desires.
Not always true. There are more then a plenty of "Useful" threads that get/are polluted with garbage, by the unrelenting sarcasm and useless rantings of ego inflated morons.

Scrolling through pages trying to pick out the helpful bits is just plain Irritating!

1Eric Rhicard wrote:Hmmm. A lot of people would get a lot more done at work. My god you could get us out of the recession.
hahahhahaha +1

Austin Baird wrote:For every one "rock and resole" thread, there are ten good threads that don't need these restrictions
Definitely NOT true. Actually, as of late, it seems the exact opposite of that. For every TEN "rock and resole" threads, there is ONE good thread that doesn't need restriction. Perhaps this is a bit of an exaggeration, but come on, even the "good" threads can't escape the worthless, sarcastic interjections of insatiable CockFighters.

Larry S wrote:How about a variation of the slashdot "Karma" system. Rather than limit their contributions, the low "Karma" score of the post and/or the low score of the user could be used to filter abusive comments/behavior out of the threads?
THIS is a great Idea!

Darren Mabe wrote:why not just delete their profiles? like a bouncer or a game of Survivor
These "people" are like Meth Addicts! They will do whatever necessary for "just one more POST!?!"
That includes setting up as many profiles as it takes to sneak a fix. Like addicts, they simply can't be trusted.

Monomaniac wrote:it would be a lot easier just to lock Ellanor's account, and more fair than punishing the entire user community over one bad apple.
I here what you're sayin...and it sounds great...problem is, it really isn't just "one bad apple". I can count AT LEAST five or six Users who seem pretty "rotten" to the core. If we could have some sort of "community vote-off" or something like that...then we could weed out as many as possible.

Of course, like I said above, they'll just come back under a Psuedo-pseudonym!
Bapgar 1 · · Out of the Loop · Joined Oct 2007 · Points: 90

I've seen other forums that use a Karma system that Larry S is talking about, it may be waaayyy too much work for the Admins to get up and running but seems like the simplest solution.

Not sure that there's any good way to control peoples verbal diarrhea but my vote is w/ the leave as is camp. Limits would probably make things worse.

M Sprague · · New England · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 5,090

I think any kind of "karma" or community-vote off system would be too susceptible to petty abuse.

coldatom · · Cambridge, MA · Joined Sep 2011 · Points: 70
Let users control what they want to see. But give them the tools.

1. Let users rate posts. Display "like" and "dislike" tally. Then people can gravitate towards highly rated posts and away from trolls.

2. Allow users to turn off posts by other users of their choosing.
FrankPS · · Atascadero, CA · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 276
David Appelhans wrote:Imagine Burt not attacking everyone because he ran out of posts! He would have to be much more selective in who is deserving of his compensating condescension.
I think some of the blatantly nasty users should be banned. At the admins discretion. There are a very few people that post ugliness every time (you listening "Burt"?).

And as far as those people using multiple profiles - they could be banned based on their regular e-mail address, not by MP username. Sure they could have multiple e-mail addresses, but it would still make it more difficult for them to get a new profile.
Ryan Nevius · · Perchtoldsdorf, AT · Joined Dec 2010 · Points: 1,837
CJC wrote: yes. again, ip ban for trolls. leave everything else alone.
Agreed. Creating any kind of daily post limit is unnecessary. It's not about the quantity of the posts that's the problem, it's the complete absence of quality. Ban people who abuse their privilege to post on these forums. Someone could post 30 times per day and still be positively contributing to discussion each and every time. Don't hurt the people who aren't part of the problem in the first place by imposing limits. Just get rid of the bad ones.
superjosh · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2004 · Points: 55

I think post limits are a great idea and would love to see them implemented on the site. A "remove bad apples" solution not only requires the moderators to constantly patrol the site but also requires a subjective determination of who's a bad apple and who's not. In contrast, posting limits are both objective and self-executing.

Curtail the spray and return the site to its former glory!

FrankPS · · Atascadero, CA · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 276
Ryan Nevius wrote: Agreed. Creating any kind of daily post limit is unnecessary. It's not about the quantity of the posts that's the problem, it's the complete absence of quality. Ban people who abuse their privilege to post on these forums. Someone could post 30 times per day and still be positively contributing to discussion each and every time. Don't hurt the people who aren't part of the problem in the first place by imposing limits. Just get rid of the bad ones.
Well-said, Ryan.
Josh Olson · · Durango, CO · Joined Mar 2010 · Points: 255
FrankPS wrote: I think some of the blatantly nasty users should be banned. At the admins discretion. There are a very few people that post ugliness every time (you listening "Burt"?). And as far as those people using multiple profiles - they could be banned based on their regular e-mail address, not by MP username. Sure they could have multiple e-mail addresses, but it would still make it more difficult for them to get a new profile.
Burt is a deterrent for stupid questions. He calls them as he sees them. Sure, he takes it too far sometimes, and he hurts peoples feelings. OH NO! When he says something way over the line, it gets erased. His trolling of photos and other things away from the forum is a different story, but his comments get buried in the forums pretty quickly. Same goes for every inflammatory poster.

The more annoying variety of troll, the ones that just like to hear themselves talk, have started trolling each other. Threads like rock and resole are 40 pages of nonsense. They don't seem to clog up threads that are actually useful or thoughtful, at least not too much. If you click on a thread entitled "Climbing Ethics," get ready for some troll bashing amusement.

My solution? Add a troll forum. Seriously. Mods could move threads to the specific troll forum, much like they do with the threads that take a drift away from climbing get moved to community. Add in a "Hide Troll Forum" link much like the FS/WTB forum.
Brandon Howard · · Denver, CO · Joined Feb 2012 · Points: 25

Warnings, suspensions and evenual total bans seems like a good road to go. There is a lot of threads that go back and forth pretty quickly with good information which the time and total post limits would take away from. If the "flag" button were more of a used feature it would be easy to see just who the jackasses truly are. Granted this would require user cooperation from everyone on MP and you might get some false flags (i.e. Someone flagging one persons comments all the time just out of personal spite) but those could be easily identified as well. Letting the masses rule is critical to the survival of the forum. So is weeding out those who are here with no interest in climbing, after all, isn't that why this website exists?

Anonymous · · Unknown Hometown · Joined unknown · Points: 0
Josh Olson wrote: Burt is a deterrent for stupid questions. He calls them as he sees them. Sure, he takes it too far sometimes, and he hurts peoples feelings. OH NO! When he says something way over the line, it gets erased. His trolling of photos and other things away from the forum is a different story, but his comments get buried in the forums pretty quickly. Same goes for every inflammatory poster. The more annoying variety of troll, the ones that just like to hear themselves talk, have started trolling each other. Threads like rock and resole are 40 pages of nonsense. They don't seem to clog up threads that are actually useful or thoughtful, at least not too much. If you click on a thread entitled "Climbing Ethics," get ready for some troll bashing amusement. My solution? Add a troll forum. Seriously. Mods could move threads to the specific troll forum, much like they do with the threads that take a drift away from climbing get moved to community. Add in a "Hide Troll Forum" link much like the FS/WTB forum.
I see what you are saying BUT, there was only one Rock and Resole. Sure it went on for 2 months, sure it was useless, sure we threw all moral reason to the wind just to get to 40 pages. But come on, it was fun(in a childish way) it kept all of us busy away from normal threads, and you knew that it was a troll thread by halfway down page 1. Therefore a Troll Thread was already created. Seems like the system works already.
Larry S · · Easton, PA · Joined May 2010 · Points: 872
M Sprague wrote:I think any kind of "karma" or community-vote off system would be too susceptible to petty abuse.
The system needs to be designed to prevent gaming. It should not be a free-for-all anyone can vote up/down type thing. Users "earn" and "spend" their mod points, while admins/moderators get unlimited so they can have a level of control over the direction of the site w/o just removing people or posts. The cumulative score on a users contributions affects a their user-score up/down, so the most that other users could do to abuse this is to down vote a few posts or two, not enough to have an affect on their ability to have visable posts.

So lets say we have a new member, let's call him "TR-toughGuy". He gets a starting user score of +2. His posts are made at a +2 level. If users/admins continuously mod his posts down, his score will drop and he will not earn any mod points of his own. If his user score hits 0 or -1, all his posts will be hidden by default. (Maybe for a set period of time?)

In a different scenario, TR-toughGuy has become a frequent user and posts repeatedly at a +2 level w/o being modded down. After a time and certain # of posts, he receives 5 mod points to use.

Or - TR-toughGuy is a frequent user and his posts are always informative and helpfull, and are modded up often (Max score of +5). He receives mod points more frequently.

The idea is that the admins/moderators direct the flow of the moderation, and as it gets established, high quality users help direct it too.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Discuss MountainProject.com
Post a Reply to "Limits on Forum Posts?"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.