Who likes the 60 second rule?

theonlygusti

bump-ing

ZZ9PluralZAlpha

theonlygusti wrote:
bump-ing

You keep changing the title.

Minecratch_project

Im okay with the 60 seconds rule, im patient, is not like 60 seconds is too much time… and when i recive this, i manage to see the disscusion of the post if i found something interesanting

customhacker

I beg to disagree, the 60 second rule is effective, though the little annoyance it may be. By the time you find a thread, read the OP and a few posts, your 60 seconds is already up! (Or at least for me it is.)

TheMonsterOfTheDeep

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.

example

BaconAndEggs1

TheMonsterOfTheDeep 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.
example

You're seriously stretching things. Stopping you from making a simple redirect, as constructive as it might be, isn't “impeding creativity”.

TheMonsterOfTheDeep

BaconAndEggs1 wrote:
TheMonsterOfTheDeep 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.
example
You're seriously stretching things. Stopping you from making a simple redirect, as constructive as it might be, isn't “impeding creativity”.

I never said “impeding creativity” - I said "impeding constructivity."

I have other posts that are much more clearly constructive, but I would have to look pretty hard to find them - and it would be hard to know that they were stopped by the 60-second rule. However, they do exist - and this post merely acts as a sort of rough evidence that they do.

Empty-Map

It's not a bad idea and I know a lot of people who are active on the forum and post a lot without spamming. I support the idea.

MathlyCat

ZZ9PluralZAlpha wrote:
theonlygusti wrote:
bump-ing
You keep changing the title.

I like the variety

customhacker wrote:
I beg to disagree, the 60 second rule is effective, though the little annoyance it may be. By the time you find a thread, read the OP and a few posts, your 60 seconds is already up! (Or at least for me it is.)

So you're not taking in:

Typing speed
Reading speed
Topic size

???

theonlygusti

MathlyCat wrote:
customhacker wrote:
I beg to disagree, the 60 second rule is effective, though the little annoyance it may be. By the time you find a thread, read the OP and a few posts, your 60 seconds is already up! (Or at least for me it is.)
So you're not taking in:

Typing speed
Reading speed
Topic size

???

Also remember that most of the time you're responding to other posts within the topic rather than the generally more thorough OP, which is almost always done within 60 seconds and forces me to wait.

V41D3H1_the_coder

I don't really like the 60 second rule but for new scratchers like me we have to wait 120 seconds which is kind of annoying cause I am a fast typer. Maybe if scratcfh really wanted a cooldown maybe it should be 5 seconds for both scratchers and new scratchers

CodeComet6161

Yeah, this is rejected now.

TOLoRS wrote:
10.1 Remove or decrease the 60 Second Rule
The “60 Second Rule” refers to the fact that Scratchers need to wait 60 seconds after posting in the forums before they can post again (120 seconds for New Scratchers). While this may seem annoying, it is extremely effective against spam. Moreover, it can require users to carefully think about what they have typed before posting. You generally do not have to wait for very long between forum posts anyway; it is just 60 seconds. Decreasing it is also rejected; that is, the number of seconds will not be changed.

Discuss Scratch