Consider limits on thread starts
 

I just spend a little time posting this warning in about 20 new topics started by www.iflyswa.com:

ALERT -- In the span of a few minutes, the original poster has started around 20 threads posting similar requests for information and opinions. Perhaps he/she is sincerely interested in getting answers to these questions, but be aware of this before you spend time helping out this FTer with your thoughts and expertise.

I believe this person was pulling a prank. It's bound to happen again. To avoid this in the future, please consider imposing a daily limit on the number of threads someone can start -- 3-5, perhaps? Maybe more for long-time FTers.

And how about a waiting period before newbies can begin new threads?
 

Here's another, related problem: Lots of newbies (and even some oldbies who haven't figured out the Search feature) begin by starting whole new threads of the form: "Has anyone ever stayed at the _______ ?" Where the hotel being asked about is something like the Westin Miyako Kyoto, the London Hilton Paddington, the Westin Times Square NYC, etc., i.e., a very well-known, heavily discussed hotel on FlyerTalk. Or, "Starwood hotels in ______?" Where the city is a major city such as London, NYC, Chicago, etc.

In other words, new threads are started every day on topics that have been posted on dozens, even hundreds, of times before, in some cases within only a few days (or hours!) prior.

This wastes human and computer resources and makes it more difficult for those who DO use the Search feature to conduct their research on the ever-proliferating number of threads covering their topic. And how many times do you think that people who have stayed at a particular hotel are going to keep re-posting their experiences when a newbie comes along and starts a new thread on that hotel?

This is only one set of examples, of course. Whenever exciting new promos come out, there are multiple threads started about them. And so on.

Very often, it's much better to just find an existing thread and (if necessary) reply to it (thus bumping it up) rather than start a whole new one. But people who are new to FlyerTalk don't always realize that.

A partial solution might be to disallow the starting of new threads by newly-registered posters, until some amount of time has elapsed -- say, two weeks, or whatever seems reasonable -- with the user being prompted to search the existing threads on FlyerTalk if they are seeking immediate answers. Of course, this will frustrate some people, but it might have a net benefit overall.

The growth of FT has accelerated enormously (well over 40,000 registered users, and scads of new ones registering daily) and the problems associated with such growth may require implementing new rules or limitations, such as suggested here, to cope with this growth.

Has anyone considered setting a "waiting period" before newbies can post? That might encourage them to use the search function!

Did you read my post just above yours?

I was suggesting a waiting period before newbies can start new threads. Perhaps there should be TWO waiting periods: a short one (say, one week or so) before a new user can post, and a longer one (say, two weeks or so) before a new user can start a new thread.

However, in this case, www.iwflyswa.com has been a member for some time now, so newbie posting restrictions would not have helped.
Also, some newbies may have been lurkiing for a while, and just now decided to register to post. A two week waiting period could lose some valuable posts.

Isn't there currently a one-minute limit preventing people from posting multiple times in a short time frame? A solution could be to leave that in place, while adding another limit of 5-10 minutes for posting new topics. (If that is possible in the current version of the software.)

In the case of the recent postings, most of them were fairly relevant. (I had clicked on a few that seemed interesting.) However, the brevity of the actual post and the lack of signifiicant response made it nothing more than a waste of time.

I don't think this problem is anywhere near important enough to warrant a restrictive rule like this.

Plus, I don't think this is an issue for the Talkboard.

Scott,

I agree with you that this is not a problem that needs to be dealt with, but disagree that it is not a TB issue.

Isn't the TB supposed to take feedback from members and pass thier recommendations along to Randy?

As Randy is already active in determaning rules for who posts where and when I personally think this should just be part of that ongoing action.

Has anyone considered a "must read previous posts in thread before I post to thread" rule? That might encourage people to avoid redundant posts!

Heh. Or the 'new thread' button could be reprogrammed to bring up the search box . . . @:-) :cool: :-:

Has anyone considered taking time out from their busy schedule of bossy bloviations that contribute nothing and growing a ****ing sense of humor?

Since you refer to a lack of a sense of humor...I was just kidding :).

No need to get defensive and aggressive :).

May I :) advise you :) to use a few :) more smilies when :) you are making :) a joke, as not :) everyone seems to understand :) your sense of humor :)

Well, apparently gleff did :).

What advice are you giving alanw? You think this is the tone in which we should talk to each other here? Thanks for your opinion as a moderator and TalkBoard member. :)

As I quoted you, I have no idea why you think I was talking to AlanW.

I already gave my opinion several posts ago. What is YOUR opinion, or are you just here to make jokes nobody understands? :)