[Question] Why the rise?

Tickle Tickle 07-15-2004 04:10 PM
The other night I finally got 1,000 posts, and was looking forward to earning a custom title. But then I found out, last month it was raised from 1,000 to 1,250 to get a custom title!

Why the big rise?
Jonny Axehandle 07-15-2004 04:15 PM
Actually, you're not wanted so every time you reach it the amount needed changes. *shot*

I guess the increase of board traffic ment more people would get it so the amount needed an increase as well.
The Fallen Phoenix 07-15-2004 04:21 PM
This thread has the answer...somewhere. It was decided fairly early on, though I don't remember which page.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 05:16 PM
Some people expressed a concern over the easy attainability of the (then Forum Legend) member title. 1,000 posts and 3 months seemed like not enough for the person to be a "veteran" so it was upped to 1,250 and 5 months. That way, the person is more likely to be a "vet" in the proper sense of the word.

The whole debate over it is in that thread. Trust me, you probably don't want to read through it, but you can if you like.

Just spam like hell, you'll get there eventually. Laughing
Tickle Tickle 07-15-2004 05:25 PM
Man, this stinks.

I think this should just to apply to new members (as in, those who joined AFTER the decision) I've been here for pretty much a year, and I've been dying to get a custom title...
Seraphim 07-15-2004 05:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by R-Umino
Man, this stinks.

I think this should just to apply to new members (as in, those who joined AFTER the decision) I've been here for pretty much a year, and I've been dying to get a custom title...


All you need is 200 more posts. Just post 100 times a day and you'll have it in two days.
Tickle Tickle 07-15-2004 05:33 PM
I've had a warning before.

I don't want another for spamming.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 05:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by R-Umino
I've had a warning before.

I don't want another for spamming.


If the posts aren't spam, then it's not spamming. Just make 100 insightful posts a day.

I guess just play it by ear.
X Prime 07-15-2004 05:44 PM
Ummm... It's impossible to make 100 decent posts a day. I tried it on broadband on a heavily populated board with replies popping up every ten seconds, it just does not happen if you want to be, quote unquoute, 'insightful'.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 05:46 PM
quote:
Originally posted by X Prime
Ummm... It's impossible to make 100 posts a day. I tried it on broadband on a heavily populated board with replies popping up every ten seconds, it just does not happen if you want to be, quote unquoute, 'insightful'.


If it takes you 60 seconds to make a post that's worthwhile (which is a lot of time, when you think about it), if you spend a bit over an hour and a half posting you'll get there - but longer because of wait times. So maybe one day or so.

It took me less than 60 seconds to type that, for example.
X Prime 07-15-2004 05:51 PM
If I'm not mistaken, this forum has a 30 second flood control setting.

...Plus, there's a 2 minute time difference if you check the times.

Furthermore, I'm a speed demon when it comes to typing, and I do it with one finger. I still could quite frankly not expect to find anyone doing what you said who did not cross the line. I only did 75 per day maximum on a faster forum than this no less (faster due to slightly less server load overall).

EDIT: Take note the above figure was before I started developing typing flaws from typing so fast, and therefore developed the habit of rereading my posts.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 05:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by X Prime
If I'm not mistaken, this forum has a 30 second flood control setting.


First post starts: 12:00:00
First post ends: 12:01:00
Second post starts: 12:01:01
Second post ends; 12:02:01

The time difference from posting the first one to posting the second is a minute and one second, so you don't have to worry about flood control.
X Prime 07-15-2004 05:59 PM
Not like it even matters, one would be warned so fast it isn't funny. If Umino's post count goes up rapidly after this, Krang is going to put two and two together and render the same punishment he did to you when you pulled such a stunt. Read: Getting warned.

Umino, have you spoken to Krang? I personaly think you're good enough...
Tickle Tickle 07-15-2004 05:59 PM
quote:
Umino, have you spoken to Krang? I personaly think you're good enough...


I've applied, and got a reponse saying I was denied because of my post count. That's when I found out about this rise.
X Prime 07-15-2004 06:01 PM
Umino, look at the current listed reason for his warning, formerly two, in the Police Department... I think that would answer your question.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 06:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by R-Umino
Seraphim, are you sure it's a good idea to be talking about making 100 posts per day?


I don't see why it's a bad idea to talk about. I said it's humanly possible to make 100 posts in one day that contributes to every thread if you spend the whole day. The key word is "contributes". Going into every thread and saying "Sounds cool!!" is spam, but posting some reply like this one (which took me about a minute to write!) is not.

EDIT: How does that "answer his question"? I'm unclear on that. Because I was warned for spamming, how does that make it a bad idea to discuss the theoretical max amounts of non-spam posts one can make in a day? It's not like I'm planning some grand scheme or formula in order to get the most efficient spam.
Tickle Tickle 07-15-2004 06:07 PM
I think X Prime has a point about me started to post alot more...

I mean, just the other day I made like 30 posts. I was working with my mom, and I had nothing to do. And if I started posting alot more now, Krang will must likely know the reason for this.

plus, if I start making a post every second to get a custom title, I will seriously look like a jackass : /
X Prime 07-15-2004 06:07 PM
Simple Seraphim. I doubt immensely that you think you deserved your warnings (and please don't bother saying anything to the contrary, because quite frankly I won't fall for that kind of drivel seeing as you immediately got a second warning after the spamming one). Therefore, it falls to common sense that what you deem constructive may simply not be good enough for the mods and admins. Therein lies the problem.

EDIT: Umino got it right.
Seraphim 07-15-2004 06:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by X Prime
Simple. I doubt immensely that you think you deserved your warnins (and please don't bother saying anything to the contrary, because quite frankly I won't fall for that kind of drivel seeing as you immediately got a second warning after the spamming one). Therefore, it falls to common sense that what you deem constructive may simply not be good enough for the mods and admins. Therein lies the problem.


Hah. That second one wasn't for spamming, that was for an argument between Evan and I. And besides, the first warning was ages ago (like three months old). Use the "Search" feature on my profile and try to find anything I've done since then that was spam (non-contributive to the discussion/thread) that's not in the Pool Room.
X Prime 07-15-2004 06:11 PM
Uh uh uh. It was listed as spamming and trolling "X2". While your argument with Evan caused Krang to go over the edge, the fact remained that Krang did not list them seperately. Therefore, unless you want to say Krang has an ulterior motive, that argument has no merit.

Furthermore, I can't make that judgment as I'm not exactly impartial.