LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

FancyFoxy wrote:

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

But what if you spam a whole lot before the Scratch Team finally demotes you?

FancyFoxy wrote:

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

But what if you spam a whole lot before the Scratch Team finally demotes you?

add (post time) to [post times v]
...
set [full time v] to ((length of [post times v]) * (60))
set [count v] to (0)
set [final v] to (0)
repeat (length of [post times v])
change [count v] by (1)
change [final v] by (item (count) of [post times v])
end
if <(final) < (full time)> then
... // Function to remove rights from user.
end

Charles12310 wrote:

FancyFoxy wrote:

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

But what if you spam a whole lot before the Scratch Team finally demotes you?

Then you wouldn't be promoted. You then, like , have to wait another 2 or more months. There would be a system which checks if you are spamming a lot. The detector would be something like this:


If this function were to be performed with Scratch blocks, it would look like this:

add (post time) to [post times v]
...
set [full time v] to ((length of [post times v]) * (60))
set [count v] to (0)
set [final v] to (0)
repeat (length of [post times v])
change [count v] by (1)
change [final v] by (item (count) of [post times v])
end
if <(final) < (full time)> then
... // Function to remove rights from user.
end

FancyFoxy wrote:

Charles12310 wrote:

FancyFoxy wrote:

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

VideoGamerCanInvent wrote:

What if you could earn the privilege to get the 60 Second Rule taken away from you? Maybe if the ST saw you helping out, not spamming and being nice we could get it taken away from us (of course, it's only a privilege, as if you started spamming that privilege would be taken away).

But what if you spam a whole lot before the Scratch Team finally demotes you?

Then you wouldn't be promoted. You then, like , have to wait another 2 or more months. There would be a system which checks if you are spamming a lot. The detector would be something like this:


If this function were to be performed with Scratch blocks, it would look like this:

add (post time) to [post times v]
...
set [full time v] to ((length of [post times v]) * (60))
set [count v] to (0)
set [final v] to (0)
repeat (length of [post times v])
change [count v] by (1)
change [final v] by (item (count) of [post times v])
end
if <(final) < (full time)> then
... // Function to remove rights from user.
end

But the ST won't respond immediately to the spam.

LionHeart70 wrote:

Hold on. Maybe you could apply for this rule being removed? However, you'd have to meet these requirements:
-You haven't gotten an alert for anything forum-related in more than a year
-You're very helpful on the forums
-You must have the Scratcher status and you must be on for at least a year

• It would add more work for the Scratch Team
  
• The 60-second rule doesn't really get in your way if you take time to think about your post. The only time the 60-second rule annoys me is when I'm bumping my posts.
  

kenny2scratch wrote:

I don't feel like this is a viable suggestion, for one simple reason. There is one more aspect of the 60s rule that hasn't been considered yet: it is also there to relieve strain on servers. If users could post as fast as they wanted, there would be a tremendous number of posts coming in, possibly even concurrently.
Besides this, what's wrong with keeping it? Sure, it can be annoying, having to wait a minute between posts, but if your posts have enough substance they should take more than a minute to write. If they don't have enough substance, then just wait the minute! It's just a minute, and you can do other productive things while you're waiting.

No support.

FancyFoxy wrote:

kenny2scratch wrote:

I don't feel like this is a viable suggestion, for one simple reason. There is one more aspect of the 60s rule that hasn't been considered yet: it is also there to relieve strain on servers. If users could post as fast as they wanted, there would be a tremendous number of posts coming in, possibly even concurrently.
Besides this, what's wrong with keeping it? Sure, it can be annoying, having to wait a minute between posts, but if your posts have enough substance they should take more than a minute to write. If they don't have enough substance, then just wait the minute! It's just a minute, and you can do other productive things while you're waiting.

No support.

I find it weird that I posted three times here and never really made my stance.
This honestly doesn't feel like something we'd need. For one, the ST would have a really tough time figuring out who is actually reliable.
Plus, I'm 99% sure this falls under “Ranks Above Scratcher”.

LionHeart70 wrote:

I don't think I'll give much support. 60 seconds isn't that long and users could always pretend to be a good forum helper so that they can have this rule removed and then they'll start spamming the forums.

miuz wrote:

hey, i have an idea! what if, there's another thing after “new scratcher” and “scratcher” that brings the rule down to 30 seconds, and you would have to have no reports for at least a year, etc.?