120 Second Flood Control???

[Skull-1]

Hi guys...

Is this a mistake? 120 seconds for flood control? Any chance you can change that to something a tiny bit more user friendly? Say...30 seconds or maybe even 60 seconds?

I feel like I'm waiting FOREVER to post a follow-up and I am sure all will agree I am not a flooder.

Many thanks.

[Hurin]

It was at five seconds. But we had a spate of some really nasty spambots come through.

The upgrade to IPB 2.2 should help the spam situation and allow us to set the flood control much lower. Shawn took some steps towards bringing the server's low-level software up to the IPB 2.2 requirments recently. So there has been some progress.

In the meantime, I'll see about setting the current setting to a more middle-ground value. You're not the first to have mentioned this. I didn't realize you folks were posting so many things one after another!

[Skull-1]

It was at five seconds. But we had a spate of some really nasty spambots come through.

The upgrade to IPB 2.2 should help the spam situation and allow us to set the flood control much lower. Shawn took some steps towards bringing the server's low-level software up to the IPB 2.2 requirments recently. So there has been some progress.

In the meantime, I'll see about setting the current setting to a more middle-ground value. You're not the first to have mentioned this. I didn't realize you folks were posting so many things one after another!

LOL!

Well when one tries to respond to multiple threads...and with a quick typing speed...

Thanks for making the change. Sorry you are still dealing with bots...

Edited May 16, 2007 by Skull-1

[azrael]

I didn't realize you folks were posting so many things one after another!

Maybe we should consider these people spammers?

[Skull-1]

Maybe we should consider these people spammers?

[JB0]

Spamspamspammityspam!

I got hit by the flood control earlier.

Doesn't happen often, but occasionally...

We should all set up a spare computer, then DDoS the spambots!

[sketchley]

Yes. I think there should be a rule against crappy one-liners. Some type of feature that forces posters to read their post for bad grammar and mispelled words would also be appreciated (hopefully it'd make the posters realize how crappy their one-liners are.) How much bandwidth would be saved???

[Mr March]

You're not the first to have mentioned this.

Hehehe, guilty as charged. I didn't mean to complain fervently, but it is a hinderance. There are sometimes 3-4 topics I wish to reply to and often there are multiple posts within a single topic I'd like to which I want to respond. The delay is quite annoying.

[pfunk]

Yes. I think there should be a rule against crappy one-liners. Some type of feature that forces posters to read their post for bad grammar and mispelled words would also be appreciated (hopefully it'd make the posters realize how crappy their one-liners are.) How much bandwidth would be saved???

naw, I like thins just the way 5they "R"

[JsARCLIGHT]

Folks should view the flood control as a 120 second "cooling off period". After all, if a person could just walk into as many threads as they wanted and walk out with a high capacity assault post that same day the flame rate would increase ten fold... imagine the virtual internet bloodbath we'd have on our hands with posts being so easy to acquire same second.

Flood control saves lives. Brought to you by the Macross World Post Prevention Center.

[jenius]

Flood control bums me out occasionally at 120 because I like to hop on to MW while at work and make a few quick posts and hop off before any coworker is the wiser

[Dante74]

Hehehe, guilty as charged. I didn't mean to complain fervently, but it is a hinderance. There are sometimes 3-4 topics I wish to reply to and often there are multiple posts within a single topic I'd like to which I want to respond. The delay is quite annoying.

You can reply to multiple posts within a topic by clicking the quote button located next to the reply button. After clicking all the quote buttons you wish to reply too, just click add reply on the bottom of the page.

[Mr March]

You can reply to multiple posts within a topic by clicking the quote button located next to the reply button. After clicking all the quote buttons you wish to reply too, just click add reply on the bottom of the page.

I don't care for that system when engaged in longer discussions, particularly with three or more replies. Members have to search for a reply to them buried in a post full of quotes. I prefer to post to people one per post unless the comments can be made briefly.

[EXO]

whoah... slow whining day on MW... not enough broken toys...

[eugimon]

whoah... slow whining day on MW... not enough broken toys...

don't worry, we're finding other topics to apply our infinite wisdom and talent to nitpick and complain about.

[Skull-1]

Flood control is up to 30 seconds again. It was lower before. What happened?

I'm trying to post two (now three because of this thread) items before I head out the door.

Here's what it does: PLEASE WAIT 30 SECS BEFORE POSTING A NEW TOPIC.

Can we perhaps set it so I can at least get the dialogue box up in order to begin typing? IOW, slave the flood control to the SUBMIT button...

Edited May 29, 2007 by Skull-1

[Hurin]

Can we perhaps set it so I can at least get the dialogue box up in order to begin typing? IOW, slave the flood control to the SUBMIT button...

We'll get our crack team of software developers right on that.

[azrael]

Flood control is up to 30 seconds again. It was lower before. What happened?

I'm trying to post two (now three because of this thread) items before I head out the door.

Here's what it does: PLEASE WAIT 30 SECS BEFORE POSTING A NEW TOPIC.

Can we perhaps set it so I can at least get the dialogue box up in order to begin typing? IOW, slave the flood control to the SUBMIT button...

That's not how IPB nor any forum software as I am aware of, works.

[Skull-1]

That's not how IPB nor any forum software as I am aware of, works.

Well that's how the forum on ProPilotworld.com works.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7

Copyright ©2000 - 2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All flood controls are slaved to the send button not the new thread/new post button. I presumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you could do the same here.

Edited May 29, 2007 by Skull-1

[azrael]

Well that's how the forum on ProPilotworld.com works.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7

Copyright ©2000 - 2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All flood controls are slaved to the send button not the new thread/new post button. I presumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you could do the same here.

Well, we don't use vBulletin here. We use IPB.

[Skull-1]

Well, we don't use vBulletin here. We use IPB.

Hey, no offense, but the tone is a little harsh. I'm aware of what you use. I'm not an expert on IPB, so relax. I wasn't trying to insult the board, you, or any other moderator, but rather, asked a legitimate question. If one program can do it then one can be inclined to presume that others do as well. I was wrong. The chippiness isn't warranted, regardless.

Meanwhile, the 30 second setting is still a bit annoying. Any accomodations that can be made to help the users out are appreciated. Hurin had it setup really nicely not too long ago (when I first mentioned it).

Edited May 29, 2007 by Skull-1

[sketchley]

Do you have the fast reply feature turned on?

[Skull-1]

Do you have the fast reply feature turned on?

Yes, sir, I do.

I was trying to "POST A NEW TOPIC" though so the flood control got me. Will "FAST REPLY" do the same?

[kensei]

Hey, no offense, but the tone is a little harsh. I'm aware of what you use. I'm not an expert on IPB, so relax. I wasn't trying to insult the board, you, or any other moderator, but rather, asked a legitimate question. If one program can do it then one can be inclined to presume that others do as well. I was wrong. The chippiness isn't warranted, regardless.

Meanwhile, the 30 second setting is still a bit annoying. Any accomodations that can be made to help the users out are appreciated. Hurin had it setup really nicely not too long ago (when I first mentioned it).

Hey no offense, but you didn't have to interpret that as harsh, cause it obviously wasn't.

The "Fast Reply" feature will help you out. You can open the box and start hittin the keys, except for the post reply one. it's great if you can be bothered typing in the HTML stuff and also can remember the codes for smilies.

[Skull-1]

Hey no offense, but you didn't have to interpret that as harsh, cause it obviously wasn't.

Yes it was. The dude was insulting my intelligence by pointing out the obvious fact that this is an IPB site (as if I can't read that on my own).

The "Fast Reply" feature will help you out. You can open the box and start hittin the keys, except for the post reply one. it's great if you can be bothered typing in the HTML stuff and also can remember the codes for smilies.

Fast reply won't work for starting a new topic though will it?

Sorry, an error occurred. If you are unsure on how to use a feature, or don't know why you got this error message, try looking through the help files for more information.

The error returned was:

Flood control is enabled on this board, please wait 30 seconds before replying or posting a new topic

At least I have a handle on the settings now. Oh well.

Stupid flood bots ruin things for all.

Edited May 30, 2007 by Skull-1

[Hurin]

Yes it was. The dude was insulting my intelligence by pointing out the obvious fact that this is an IPB site (as if I can't read that on my own).

You posted the version and copyright of different forum software and then ask why ours doesn't work like theirs?

And when it's pointed out as matter-of-factly as possible with absolutely no extraneous language or anything even remotely insulting that (as is readily apparent by reading the bottom of our forums). . . we don't use that software but instead use IPB. . . you claim that someone is insulting your intelligence?

Let's try this from another angle:

Tim is using Bob's computer

Tim: Hey! Where's the big clock?

Bob: What big clock?

Tim: The big clock. It's a "gadget" for Windows Vista.

Bob: Well, this computer isn't Vista. It's Windows XP.

Tim: How dare you insult my intelligence!?!

Bob has said nothing wrong. Rather, it's probably the case that Tim is lashing out because he's a bit embarrassed that he had lept to conclusions and also possibly because he failed to recognize that the computer he was using was XP instead of Vista.

I'm not sure if you realized that we weren't using the same forum software when you posted the version of that piloting site. And I'm not sure that you recognize that it would be expected that different forum software behave differently (though you now apparently do). But based on your prior complaints ("go to last post" etc.) , I'm pretty darn sure that you don't really appreciate exactly how much (or little) control we have over every tiny aspect of how "off-the-shelf" software works. We don't write this stuff. We just manage and moderate it. Most of this type of feedback would be better directed to IPB themselves.

I've often had users at my real job ask me to make Microsoft Word do things that it simply can't do. . . and they don't seem to grasp the concept that a Network Administrator can't just "rewrite" Word on a whim.

It basically comes down to this:

Either

You posted the information you did knowing that we didn't use that software. In which case, you needed to have the obvious pointed out to you: That different software behaves differently.

Or

You posted the information you did and did not realize that we were using different software. In which case you needed to have the obvious pointed out to you: That we use different software. And different software behaves differently.

Take your pick. But either way, please stop trying to pick a fight with the Staff (again!).

H

[sketchley]

Well said Hurin.

[kensei]

Seconded.

[Skull-1]

You posted the version and copyright of different forum software and then ask why ours doesn't work like theirs?

Come on, H. I posted the information because it was stated/suggested to me that no other bulletin board software worked the way I proposed (see below). I merely set the record straight, that's all, bud.

That's not how IPB nor any forum software as I am aware of, works.

It basically comes down to this:

Either

You posted the information you did knowing that we didn't use that software. In which case, you needed to have the obvious pointed out to you: That different software behaves differently.

Let me give you an analogy from my perspective so you'll see what I was thinking. A word processor is a word processor is a word processor. So too is a spreadsheet a spreadsheet a spreadsheet. Although they don't all work identically they *DO* all work SIMILARLY. My suggestion that you slave things to the submit button is akin to assuming that a word processor from ACME has a feature allowing you to center text just as the processor from WIDGETS does. An incorrect assumption on my part I freely admitted.

As for the comment that seems to have you riled up at me, I wasn't speaking to what IPB could or couldn't do. I was responding to the incorrect assertion that no BBS has a flood control slaved to the submit button when there are some that in fact do. I don't have intimate knowledge of any BB software so you'll have to forgive my request for something that ins't possible with IPB. My bad all the way.

Or

You posted the information you did and did not realize that we were using different software. In which case you needed to have the obvious pointed out to you: That we use different software. And different software behaves differently.

Take your pick. But either way, please stop trying to pick a fight with the Staff (again!).

H

I merely responded to a comment and stated a truth. Nobody is trying to pick a fight, but if you are going to call me out in public then please at least keep the facts straight. I was not attacking, criticising, or fighting with anyone on the staff. I was politely asking for a setting change and then suffered a couple of wisecracks at my expense that were unwarranted in my view.

I freely admitted that I was unaware of IPB's capabilities and merely made a POLITE request for an adjustment to the flood contol. How that has become such a scandal is perplexing at best. If anyone is trying to pick a fight here I assure you it is not me. At least Azrael said he was unaware of such a thing. The "We'll get our software developers right on that" crack was a bit over the line I'd say (though I admit it was funny).

Hurin, you and I have been civil for some time now. Let's keep it that way. I have no beef with you and I don't think you have cause for one with me of late.

At the end of the day I can only say I'm sorry you have to resort to flood controls because people are trying to screw with the site. You guys are doing a fine job and I appreciate your efforts. Thanks for trying, regardless. A special thanks to you Hurin for responding so quickly to my initial request for a change to the settings.

Edited May 31, 2007 by Skull-1

[Hurin]

A word processor is a word processor is a word processor. So too is a spreadsheet a spreadsheet a spreadsheet. Although they don't all work identically they *DO* all work SIMILARLY. My suggestion that you slave things to the submit button is akin to assuming that a word processor from ACME has a feature allowing you to center text just as the processor from WIDGETS does. An incorrect assumption on my part I freely admitted.

No, that's not an apt analogy.

Yes, you can assume that each forum will have the ability to post, quote, reply, etc. But you're talking about changing how a program functions behind the scenes. A better analogy for what you were requesting (and other requests in the past) is you opening said Word Processor and saying: "I want the print button to bring up print preview first, before it asks me which printer I want to use. . . like ACME's WordWizard does."

Which of course, is just not possible and not within the capabilities of an end-user (or even an administrator) unless the software developer has had the foresight to add that option in a place where the user can set it. Software just isn't as flexible as you seem to want to believe. It only provides options that the developers can foresee.

So, back to our current situation: I mean, do you really think in the Forum's back-end somewhere that there is likely to be a checkbox for "Assert Flood Control on Submit rather than Reply/New Post?"

This and other conversations we've had with you regarding the boards only serves to demonstrate to me that you don't have a firm grip on these types of concepts.

As for the rest of it, I really don't care to deal with it. I would direct everyone once again to the words that were apparently so insulting:

Well, we don't use vBulletin here. We use IPB.

That is insulting nobody's intelligence (as you put it). It is merely a statement of fact and it is forgivable that someone would assume that it would intuitively mean something to you (that different software behaves differently).

I frankly don't have the time or patience to salve your (once again) bruised ego. But, if it is any consolation, I have learned something: That humor or good-natured jabs that are intended to both answer your question (briefly) and prompt you to consider that your request might not be as simple (or as important) as you seem to think, are totally and utterly lost on you. But instead, just start another round of you claiming that you're being disrespected or insulted.

So, in the future, I will either answer your question as matter-of-factly as possible (though that didn't help Azrael). . . or. . . if I don't have time to explain the underpinning facts or concepts in enough detail to satisfy you, I'll just simply ignore. That's the best I can do. Because, apparently, brevity or levity is seen as insulting.

Are we done now? Or will there be indignant, righteous anger?

H

Edit: Bah! I should have re-read the post today before responding. I assume that "special thanks to Hurin" part was thrown in after my initial read yesterday. Now I get to feel like an a-hole for being so. . . ahem. . . direct!

[Skull-1]

No, that's not an apt analogy.

Yes, you can assume that each forum will have the ability to post, quote, reply, etc. But you're talking about changing how a program functions behind the scenes.

No I wasn't. I was asking you to slave the thing to a button because other BBSes allow it. When informed it was not possible I didn't repeat the request.

You will note that the following buttons trigger flood control:

- Post Reply

- Post New Topic

- Fast Reply (Advanced)

While the following does not:

- Fast Reply (Basic)

This implied to me that it was a selectable function. Now I know it isn't. Oh well.

Software just isn't as flexible as you seem to want to believe. It only provides options that the developers can foresee.

Bravo to VBulletin for being ahead of IPB in the development curve then.

So, back to our current situation: I mean, do you really think in the Forum's back-end somewhere that there is likely to be a checkbox for "Assert Flood Control on Submit rather than Reply/New Post?"

Apparently there is with VB.

So, in the future, I will either answer your question as matter-of-factly as possible (though that didn't help Azrael). . . or. . . if I don't have time to explain the underpinning facts or concepts in enough detail to satisfy you, I'll just simply ignore. That's the best I can do. Because, apparently, brevity or levity is seen as insulting.

How about this: I'll try not to be so sensitive to what you write and you, if it crosses your mind to do so, be sure to put a wink or smiley after a joke so I won't take it the wrong way. That's the generally accepted convention for jokes on the Internet because the type-written word can often come across far harsher than intended. Considering how we have not always seen eye to eye it would go a long way toward showing no intended malice (if such a thing is a consideration). There is no ill-will on my side any longer.

Edit: Bah! I should have re-read the post today before responding. I assume that "special thanks to Hurin" part was thrown in after my initial read yesterday. Now I get to feel like an a-hole for being so. . . ahem. . . direct!

Don't sweat it. I added it shortly after I posted the note because it was apparently lost on everyone when posted earlier in the thread. I noted also that my tone came across harsher than intended as originally worded and wanted to be sure that the tone I was sending out was the tone you received. Sorry for the confusion.

I want to emphasize that the nature of my post was not an attack and that I do appreciate your help on various matters despite what appears to be a less than cordial interaction in public.

Cheers!

Edited June 1, 2007 by Skull-1

[Hurin]

No I wasn't. I was asking you to slave the thing to a button because other BBSes allow it. When informed it was not possible I didn't repeat the request.

It's not that that other BBSes allow it, it's just the they coded their flood control. More on this below. . .

This implied to me that it was a selectable function. Now I know it isn't. Oh well.

. . .

Bravo to VBulletin for being ahead of IPB in the development curve then.

. . .

Apparently there is with VB.

Again. . . this is not an option or setting. Those running VB did not choose to make it work that way. That is just the way the VB developers coded their board. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that, in the VB back-end, there is no setting that will allow VB to function like IPB in this respect. It's a difference in functionality, not a setting.

I also feel compelled to point out that IPB is generally considered to be the best forum software available (though the version here is in need of an update). Saying that VB is "ahead" of IPB merely because they implemented their flood control differently (in a way 99% of people probably wouldn't notice) seems a bit odd to me.

H

[Skull-1]

It's not that that other BBSes allow it, it's just the they coded their flood control. More on this below. . .

Again. . . this is not an option or setting. Those running VB did not choose to make it work that way. That is just the way the VB developers coded their board. I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that, in the VB back-end, there is no setting that will allow VB to function like IPB in this respect. It's a difference in functionality, not a setting.

Perhaps. (EDIT IN: There are numerous "hacks" available with custom flood controls for VB but I have no idea what all the possibilities are.) I have no actual hands-on experience with either one so I admit to not knowing--though I will find out. Meanwhile the smart money is probably on your interpretation.

I also feel compelled to point out that IPB is generally considered to be the best forum software available (though the version here is in need of an update). Saying that VB is "ahead" of IPB merely because they implemented their flood control differently (in a way 99% of people probably wouldn't notice) seems a bit odd to me.

H

I find them all fairly similar. There are things I prefer with VB and things I prefer here. I will say this however: R*botech.com has absolutely without question THE *WORST* BBS in the world. Just horrid.

Edited June 2, 2007 by Skull-1

[Hurin]

I find them all fairly similar.

Well, yes. . . to the user they all appear similar. But then again, the user isn't concerned with management tasks in the back-end.

[Skull-1]

Well, yes. . . to the user they all appear similar. But then again, the user isn't concerned with management tasks in the back-end.

True, true. Hence my requesting of you guys the impossible!