message post timeout

Is there any way we could lower the minimum time between posts? I regularly find myself waiting to post because it hasn't been 120 seconds. Maybe something like 60 seconds would be a good compromise?

....case and point, when I tried to post this:
"1. This forum requires that you wait 120 seconds between posts. Please try again in 52 seconds."

...and just for fun:
"1. This forum requires that you wait 120 seconds between posts. Please try again in 27 seconds."

 

I understand, but the site is set up this way because of spammers getting on and posting. This controls them being able to get back on and post right away. Sorry.

 

Right, the shorter we make that timeout the more rapid fire SPAM we get. The delay actually seems to help...very few people who are legit posters even know about it.

 

I'm having the converse problem... being logged out while spending time writing longer posts. Is there any way to increase this interval?

There are two site specific issues with this...

first, this site's page layouts are very heavy and complex so they tend to render very slowly... (I've tried the "low bandwidth" options, but they have significant viewing and nav limits)

second, the auto login page that pops up has the "submit" button so low that it has to be scrolled up to tap... perhaps putting the verbose explanation text below the button rather than above it to push the button higher?

I'm really an nntp type of guy and this is currently the only one of two web forum I participate in... so the speed and nav issues here really help me appreciate nntp ;-)

Beverly Howard [MS MVP-Mobile Devices]

 

I second the post issue. I often open up one thread after the other and reply to them in rapid succession. The 2 minute wait is painful. Is spam really that big of a problem? One minute would be more reasonable I think.

 

i open multiple pages too. I can't stand to have my taskbar be devoid of windows.

1 minute would be nice, and I find it hard to believe that the "legit" posters don't know about it. While I appreciate trying to knock spam down, say someone has 4 or 5 threads to respond to, man, 2 minute wait is painful. If you want to stop spam, heck 5 minutes is better. Why not TRY a minute and see how it goes?

 

I agree, i usually get on and answer 4-5 threads in a row. And it takes ten minutes to do that.

I think 1 minute would be a very reasonable time. Usually when i get the message its around 45-60 seconds.

I think you would have a lot more activity in the forum this way as well. A couple times i found myself un able to post, since i would get a 1minute message, and dont have time to wait 1 minute. This is because half the time, im posting at work, and I usually get busy in spurts, and have 10-15 minute times where nothing is going on.

I could only imagine that im not the only person who has been unable to post due to this. Therefore assuming that with a smaller wait time, there would be a few more posts, and in all actuality they could be very helpful answers to some questions. And these questions may need to be answered by a certain time, and it would be a shame if i couldnt get back to answer the question in time...

Over time I think we could notice more helpful, informative posts. The 2 minute wait almost discourages people from posting their answers and opinions as often as would be effective in some situations (multiple threads).