Why do I have to wait for so long before I can post after I just posted something?

[Timpo]

Have you guys ever noticed this? It's so annoying.

Also people who are actually helping each other may not be able to answer other people's question because they have to wait for so long to post something.

What's the point of this? I have never seen a so restricted forum.

 

[J.R.]

Have you guys ever noticed this? It's so annoying.

Also people who are actually helping each other may not be able to answer other people's question because they have to wait for so long to post something.

What's the point of this? I have never seen a so restricted forum.

Because Chinese spammers post hundreds of posts in minutes here. It happened several times just a couple of months ago. Worth waiting to keep the board free of spam.

 

[Ann M.]

Timpo, J.R. is correct. We had spammers using automated systems that could dump 300 posts in under a minute! However, I'm glad you spoke up. How long do you have to wait between posts? I think we set it at 3 minutes or so but with me monitoring the new members more closely we might be able to shave that post time down (a bit )

 

[rich c]

Keeps them Russian bots held at bay too!

 

[rich c]

It depends, sometimes I have to wait 260 seconds and sometimes 50 seconds.. I am guessing my time has been set to 5 minutes or so?

If you need to keep spammers away, that's totally understandable.

But is there's a way to automatically set no waiting time for people with 100 posts? (I'm saying 100 just as an example)

Because some of the members who have been here for long enough, especially the ones with "Well-Known Member" status, what's the chance of them spamming the forum?

I am guessing the spammers would make a brand new account (with 0 posts), and automatically spam with 300 posts.
Just an idea.. because it's causing quite a bit of inconvenience.. and probably more so for people who post here more frequently than I do.

It works great for me, waiting a few minutes is a small price compared to the effort needed by Ann M. and others to fight off the spammers in the past. If it was changed, based on a volume number, the spammers would hit that in seconds. Your life was be at a quicker pace than mine Timpo. You can just go read a couple more posts and then come back and hit your post reply button.

 

[AlanDB]

The wait works OK for me. It's a lot better than Captcha and other methods used on some other sites. I like to compose and proofread my message before sending it anyway. By the time I am finished composing, it will often go through without a problem.

 

[PowerMe]

I would think 60 seconds would be enough. Certainly worth testing it out, yes?

 

[Oldbkr]

Ya gotta do what ya gotta do..Thanks for the work done to preserve this fine forum?

 

[Kurt in CT]

Timpo, glad you asked this question. I was wondering also.

 

[MetroDuck]

Timpo, J.R. is correct. We had spammers using automated systems that could dump 300 posts in under a minute! However, I'm glad you spoke up. How long do you have to wait between posts? I think we set it at 3 minutes or so but with me monitoring the new members more closely we might be able to shave that post time down (a bit )

I ran into this tonight. It was 260 seconds. I understand the need for a delay but 60 seconds would seem more reasonable. I saw it was going to take four minutes to post an answer to someones question and I moved on. Discovered it before going to bed still on my screen so I posted it then.

 

[jazz]

Yea it is annoying. I think 1 minute is also appropriate.

 

[tomjasz]

Timpo, J.R. is correct. We had spammers using automated systems that could dump 300 posts in under a minute! However, I'm glad you spoke up. How long do you have to wait between posts? I think we set it at 3 minutes or so but with me monitoring the new members more closely we might be able to shave that post time down (a bit )

I'm getting hammered, and MORE than 3 minutes. I've given up on a dozen posts in the last few days. 248seconds on thepreviousnand 73 on this one.