Bump. Just ran into this issue again.

I believe that this would be a good idea because I'm a fast typer, so often, when I just finish a reply, the 60-second rule stops me from posting it, so I just leave it there and work on the next one and forget about it, and then when I remember it, there are multiple posts that are just sitting around, so it takes several minutes to post them, etc…

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

Too be honest the 60-second rule does not effect me at all and yes it is true it has helped me write longer and better posts while waiting for the 60-second timer to be done.

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

They wouldn't be happy having to wait 60 seconds to post each bump. Also, they wouldn't be happy if they encountered the short post message that stopped them from bumping.

Honestly the 60 second rule should be removed and it should be the community's responsibility to report spammers. That's as simple as it needs to be.

The4thPixel wrote:

Honestly the 60 second rule should be removed and it should be the community's responsibility to report spammers. That's as simple as it needs to be.

But that would create more work for the Scratch Team, looking at more reports than they already are. Plus,

jvvg wrote:

5. Removing 60/120 second rule, New Scratcher status, etc.
While all of these things may seem annoying, they are extremely effective shields against spam.

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

They wouldn't be happy having to wait 60 seconds to post each bump. Also, they wouldn't be happy if they encountered the short post message that stopped them from bumping.

So you support this suggestion? I was just confused by you saying “half support” and then giving a reason for full support.

The4thPixel wrote:

Honestly the 60 second rule should be removed and it should be the community's responsibility to report spammers. That's as simple as it needs to be.

Doesn't work because:

1. ST can't rely on the community to add cloud lists; why trust it with no spam?
2. Rejected
3. just throttle

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

They wouldn't be happy having to wait 60 seconds to post each bump. Also, they wouldn't be happy if they encountered the short post message that stopped them from bumping.

So you support this suggestion? I was just confused by you saying “half support” and then giving a reason for full support.

I said something about what is currently there that might annoy people for the support side, and something about your suggestion that could annoy people. Therefore, 50% each way, half support.

Bump

dvargasews wrote:

I believe that this would be a good idea because I'm a fast typer, so often, when I just finish a reply, the 60-second rule stops me from posting it, so I just leave it there and work on the next one and forget about it, and then when I remember it, there are multiple posts that are just sitting around, so it takes several minutes to post them, etc…

#humblebrag

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

They wouldn't be happy having to wait 60 seconds to post each bump. Also, they wouldn't be happy if they encountered the short post message that stopped them from bumping.

So you support this suggestion? I was just confused by you saying “half support” and then giving a reason for full support.

I said something about what is currently there that might annoy people for the support side, and something about your suggestion that could annoy people. Therefore, 50% each way, half support.

What you stated would only happen if you decided to Bump 10 topics (more like 3)

MathlyCat wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

theonlygusti wrote:

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:

I half-support your suggestion, but what if someone had a few topics that they wanted to bump?

Yeah?

They wouldn't be happy having to wait 60 seconds to post each bump. Also, they wouldn't be happy if they encountered the short post message that stopped them from bumping.

So you support this suggestion? I was just confused by you saying “half support” and then giving a reason for full support.

I said something about what is currently there that might annoy people for the support side, and something about your suggestion that could annoy people. Therefore, 50% each way, half support.

What you stated would only happen if you decided to Bump 10 topics (more like 3)

I have 3 topics that I have to bump and I am usually caught with the 60 seconds. Are you saying that the short post thing would say something after 10 posts?

Why would someone want to post twice within a minute? The 60 second rule never hurts scratchers who make constructive well thought posts.

carsracer wrote:

Why would someone want to post twice within a minute? The 60 second rule never hurts scratchers who make constructive well thought posts.

They do if the Scratcher is a fast typer.

carsracer wrote:

Why would someone want to post twice within a minute? The 60 second rule never hurts scratchers who make constructive well thought posts.

I feel like I make constructive replies. At least, I try to. But the 60-second rule has frustrated me countless times. Like right now for instance.

dvargasews wrote:

carsracer wrote:

Why would someone want to post twice within a minute? The 60 second rule never hurts scratchers who make constructive well thought posts.

They do if the Scratcher is a fast typer.

Very true. I can go up to 90 WPM.

The4thPixel wrote:

dvargasews wrote:

carsracer wrote:

Why would someone want to post twice within a minute? The 60 second rule never hurts scratchers who make constructive well thought posts.

They do if the Scratcher is a fast typer.

Very true. I can go up to 90 WPM.

That's very fast!