I could post about how I could do something within 3 minutes during that time.
60 seconds is already annoyingly long, why should we have to suffer even more?

Mr_PenguinAlex wrote:

I could post about how I could do something within 3 minutes during that time.
60 seconds is already annoyingly long, why should we have to suffer even more?

Exactly. 60 seconds is long enough. Why would he want to make it longer?

NO,
NO,
NO!!
This is worse than the 60-second rule and is very unnecessary!

To be fair, I appreciate that you're trying to reduce spam; I just don't see it as much of a problem nowadays (in the form that you're trying to prevent it in)

Please no. I don't want to have to write more small text under my post to pass the time.

Like this! If you increase it, this little text might become a paragraph. Yes, I am overaxaggerating.

I think this topic is a joke. Should we ignore it?gnuculrulbk hulb grbiuleg builegu l gu


(Screw you coco, You made me drop my keyboard for the 6th time!)

Heck no support. The 60s rule is bad enough, especially if you are trying to help people, 90s would turn the forums into heck

DawnRooney27 wrote:

gnuculrulbk hulb grbiuleg builegu l gu

I do not support for the reasons listed above

No support, a lot of drama will happen.

Scratchy697 wrote:

DawnRooney27 wrote:

gnuculrulbk hulb grbiuleg builegu l gu

I do not support for the reasons listed above

What it necessary to quote my mistake?

DawnRooney27 wrote:

Scratchy697 wrote:

DawnRooney27 wrote:

gnuculrulbk hulb grbiuleg builegu l gu

I do not support for the reasons listed above

What it necessary to quote my mistake?

Probably because there's no reason to support it, as everyone knows it would just be a pain.

Ihatr wrote:

DawnRooney27 wrote:

Scratchy697 wrote:

DawnRooney27 wrote:

gnuculrulbk hulb grbiuleg builegu l gu

I do not support for the reasons listed above

What it necessary to quote my mistake?

Probably because there's no reason to support it, as everyone knows it would just be a pain.

it was a joke sorry ;-;

bump cause i refrenced this and want to restart conversation here xD

30 seconds extra seconds wouldn't make that much of a difference to the 60 second rule. And 3 minutes for new scratchers is just obnoxious.

Ahh if this is too long I can't post relevant information, this will not stop spam it will instead cause panic

No support

even if you are a Scratcher and you edit your own post, chances are, that person won't see a change

Nope, absolutely not. The 60 sec rule is evil enough as it is, I assure you, more people would hit a 90 second rule rather than a 60 second rule, despite not spamming, and being constructive. 180 seconds for new scratchers? I'd feel sorry for them, as while they are more likely to be spambots than a scratcher is, they'd have much more inconvenience and annoyance in their lives than necessary.

HUGE NO SUPPORT, 60 SECONDS IS ENOUGH.

No support. At all. In fact, negative support, if such thing exists.
The 60-second rule is already annoying enough for established and active users, and I've never seen any spam. So there's no reason to increase it.
I don't think a 180-second rule would be great either, but that's not as bad.

No support, 60 seconds is already enough and annoying. There's rarely spam on the forums, and usually the spam is coming from new users on the forums that are learning about it.

No support, this would cause rage between Scratchers.