I can’t write more than 3 posts in a row in the same thread. That makes meetup threads (e.g.) hard to maintain for very long.
That’s a setting we can change, though it does seem like a reasonable default.
But there is actually an exception to the rule: the topic creator has no limit to their consecutive replies. I’ve seen you’ve already made a new topic, but we could change the owner of the original topic so you can continue posting there. Up to you which you’d prefer.
This effect should be a sequential post cooldown of 15-30 seconds on “new” accounts - not a hard count limit - that is meant to prevent new accounts blasting mechanized spam posts into the forum, and currently everyone is considered “new”. I’ve gone ahead and promoted @ChrisC level which should make that shorter or remove it.
Honestly I don’t see why we in particular need the three-consecutive-post limit. It’s already caused a problem and I’m not sure what problems it would create if it’s not there–I don’t remember there ever being any problems in the old forum that stemmed from someone making too many posts in a row on the same topic. I say we lift it.
Perhaps that limit is there to avoid “refloat” old topics by his author, topics that are not of anybody else interest. It’s just an idea, i can’t think another reason.
I researched, and the intention of it is to prevent rage-post-griefing by a user who signs up specifically to do this with a new account - they have to wait a day before sequential posts without reply in a single thread are allowed.
Raising the limit wouldn’t help since ChrisC had historically (before the migration) updated that thread many times without anyone else replying before his attempted reply today. After 24 hours, that would no longer be in effect, or if someone had replied in sequence to his he wouldn’t have had the problem.
We’re discussing methods to fix this, possibly by promoting known users manually.
It’s probably best to automatically promote all users who have more than a certain amount of posts (like 20 or so perhaps.)
Spamming is usually done by new accounts only.
Yes, if there’s a way to automatically make all the users who established themselves on the old forum be promoted to not-new-users on this forum, that seems like a good idea.
No, the error message I got said the limit was more than 3 in a row by the same author, not 1, and it didn’t say anything about seniority of the poster. I think this is a global restriction, separate from the new user limitations.
Well, the new thread has been closed and merged into the old one, so (assuming the limit can’t be changed) it looks like it’s going to need to be the latter.
I merged it because I thought that’s what you wanted. I can put it back if you’d prefer.
I had problems with the 3 post limit the other day. It was in the unread posts thread, which I didn’t start. I went away for 24 hours until I could post again!
The three consecutive posts limit is distinct from other restrictions, and applies to all trust levels.
Well, unless you want to do this every month when I can’t reply again, we’ll have to find some sort of permanent solution, regardless.
Chris, are you having trouble posting right now? Looking at thread, Hanon has the last reply which should enable you to post again without running afoul of this right now.
I’d like to fix the issue–my question is whether it needs to be fixed right now in order for you to be able to post or whether I have time to wait for a staff member who knows how to change the thread owner, or something.
I had raised max-replies to 5. I could further raise it to 10, but as you state, that sounds like it will be a monthly thing which won’t solve your specific problem and will end up defeating its original purpose - which is to dissuade people from bumping topics that aren’t receiving replies and inspiring actual discussion.
Perhaps the best solution for you is to create a new topic whenever you wish to announce an upcoming meetup instead of continuing the same meetup thread which doesn’t get replies and consists of just you just bumping it with a new date. I’d suggest putting the meetup date in the title so the topic won’t exactly match another one, which I believe is another thing Discourse may not allow.
@ChrisC - I am sorry that this may require a modification in your posting habits. Discourse expects a slightly different set of behaviors than phpBB does. I hope that is an overall net positive, but I can understand how it may not have seemed that way in your case.
Perhaps this is a good new paradigm, though, and by starting fresh threads instead of using one that has an old original post date, you’ll get new eyes on it and perhaps some feedback discussion more often since it will count as an “unread” post for people tracking the category. This is why we split “Events” into its own category out of General Discussion, so by all means, utilize it well to promote your gathering. You can also click the link button to automatically promote your post here on Twitter, Facebook, or email it to a private list of recipients.
We’re going to try shifting the ownership of the original post in the thread to you–hopefully that will make you the thread owner which should remove consecutive-post restrictions.
If that doesn’t work, maybe starting a new thread would be a good idea (there may have been some miscommunication about that before); a new thread should let you post unrestrictedly.
Dan, who has experience with Discourse, said that this feature could be useful to prevent spam so I’m a little reluctant to disable it entirely, but let me know if you ever run into more issues with it.
Here’s the new thread. @ChrisC, bump this like it’s a 1975 discotheque and see if it works for you.
Thanks, @matt_weiner for pointing out that frequent thread bumpers like Eric Matyas don’t have the same problem when they own the topic.
The other solution to this, as much as I hate to make things more complicated, is we could make the original a Wiki, which means anyone with sufficient privileges can edit the original and change the meetup details. That would solve separate people needing to make a new thread when they inherit ongoing events.
Nope, forget I said that. IT’S TOO MUCH POWER TO INFORM THE MASSES THEY HAD ALL ALONG…
OK, thanks! I’ll see how this goes.
A wiki seems like a bad idea for updating a recurring event, partly because there won’t be a clear record of past events (I assume anyone can read the edit history of a Discourse wiki, but that’s clunky and non-obvious), and more importantly any conversation won’t be threaded properly in between the announcements and descriptions of each new event.
Just having to make a new thread when you want to take ownership of a thing like this seems simple enough.