Question: 45sec Limit on VMs

[Yusshin]

Why do we have to wait 45sec between VMs >> I know moderators can avoid it with their anti-waiting powers, but why do normal members need to wait? Is it to avoid those random, seldom-seen spambots from using VM to sell nasty products?

It's really annoying. Sometimes I'll be VM'ing five people at once :| and it takes four minutes to respond, in which I receive responses of my responses in that time frame.

Just curious .-. don't bite me

 

[Spinor]

I think I would actually be for decreasing this limit. I've had my days when I had to post a lot of VMs, and quickly too. Those days when I see the "Wait x seconds before posting again" messages I'm like "FFFFUUU...".

I would say 5 15 sounds reasonable.

 

[.Gamer]

So spambots can't spam all over profiles, tbh, I thought that answer was obvious....

 

[Yusshin]

So spambots can't spam all over profiles, tbh, I thought that answer was obvious....

I've barely seen any spambots; the ones I've kinda "seen" are for PMs and not VMs :s

In any case, 45sec wait for members to avoid a few spambots is kinda... I don't know how to explain that. It's an inconvenience for just a few 'bots that you can moderate off your VM board + report.

 

[Nick]

I've barely seen any spambots; the ones I've kinda "seen" are for PMs and not VMs :s

In any case, 45sec wait for members to avoid a few spambots is kinda... I don't know how to explain that. It's an inconvenience for just a few 'bots that you can moderate off your VM board + report.

I agree. The majority of the members here are smart enough to handle that kind of spam on their own and seeing as how it's their profile, some even enjoy being able to monitor what gets put on there. It does seem like a terrible inconvenience for members to have to go through just because of a few spambots or spammers of one sort or another. I think members can handle their own and report a visitor message that's spamming their profile and take the liberty to delete it from their profile. I think removing the limit would also draw more attention to it as well if the case is spammers seeing as how the violation is likely to be reported quicker if there's more of it somewhere than someone thinking it's a joke or something to the sort. It doesn't seem like a terrible thing to shorten the length of time for visitor messages to be posted, or even remove it all together. Even with the reason (which is a logical one) it's always seemed rather pointless to me to have it.

 

[Melody]

I'll agree with that. If there's a way to lower the timeout for VMs only, it'd be wonderful. However I do suspect that the setting is indeed Global and can't be adjusted for individual systems. In that case, I'd suggest a usergroup you graduate to once you have say...15 posts which allows you to either skip the 45 second wait time or only have to wait...say 15 seconds. I'm not certain if it's possible to enforce a different anti-flood wait for different usergroups.

Additionally, it may be useful as a supporter perk. If you're in a certain tier or higher, you could be allowed to skip the flood-wait entirely! (But of course this depends wildly upon how well the server could handle that load, so deploying it to supporters to test it out wouldn't be too bad, then deploying it to the members globally)

 

[Melody]

You know very well how the staff feels about giving the supporters any more perks. :(

Actually, I've heard a few grunts about it, but none of them seem too adamant about not giving them more if they feel it's minor enough. This is a minor enough 'perk' that it's certainly not going to harm anything. Additionally, donating tends to 'authenticate' you as an actual person and not a bot.

Naturally, when I suggested it as a supporter perk, I meant as a temporary perk (it is a supporter perk to get to see things while they're in beta) while Steve takes a good look at how lowering the flood-wait time affects server stability and decides if the server itself can handle all of PC's members who have more than 15 posts, being able to post every 5, 10 or 15 seconds versus a 45 second cool down for all non-staff members.

 

[Hiidoran]

I'm actually in favor of decreasing the flood control time. Personally, I think it should come with the ability to post images and links. If they make it to 15 posts without one of us realizing that they're spamming and banning them, chances are they're not gonna spam VMs.

Never did like that flood control when I was a member, especially since the character limit isn't in effect and they're made to be just a wee bit spammy. :P

 

[Zet]

I swear supporters had a decreased time frame for VMs, though seeing a decreased time for normal members would be good, like 25 seconds.

 

[Yusshin]

15-20sec seems better :s 45sec is really annoying, and as said before, you can just moderate and report those seldom-seen spambots anyway.

 

[Mika]

Uh, guys? >>;;

It's only 0:45 seconds.

It's less than a minute between VMs.

I mean, if you really want to talk to someone in a more fast paced manor, why not just add them on an instant messenger? If you can't download one, use meebo or other web based clients. :x No sense in stabbing the poor server with your vms when you could just be im'ing instead, you know?

 

[Melody]

Mika, Not all of us like to or allowed to IM, and web based clients are poorly built and poorly supported on ALL platforms of IM, including MSN, Yahoo! and AIM.

 

[Flare Riqueza]

Hmmm...

I do use IM, but that's for my real life friends.

I separate things out. I always though Vm was meant to be the closest thing PC has to IM.

I think it'd be brilliant if the time-limit were lowered, too.

EDIT: Also, with regards to spam. We have an option to block everyone but Mods and Contacts, right? Well, we can remove contacts easily enough. And you're really smart if you've got to Moderator status without being spotted...

 

[Yusshin]

Some of us can't add certain members to IM either, for private reasons.

For example, if I want to talk to Zet, Mizan de la Plume Kuro, Misheard Whisper, etc. it'll need to be by VM. I can't add them to MSN. Again, private reasons.

And many people want to keep their IM private, too, and not add members from PC to it. That's where chatting with five people at one time on PC and getting annoyed with the 45sec delay comes into play.

 

[Rukario]

its not likely we'll change this as its a global setting.. i.e. it affects all user postings on PC including new threads, replies, blog entries and replies, and VMs.

 

[EmeraldSerenade]

A time decrease for posting VM's would be nice, but as stated in the other posts above, its to stop those pesky spambots -.-
Its really annoying though when your talking to 5 other people and you have to wait to post a VM -.-
I can live with that though ;P

Hey, if you gave supporters less waiting time, people would be encouraged to donate!

 

[Yusshin]

its not likely we'll change this as its a global setting.. i.e. it affects all user postings on PC including new threads, replies, blog entries and replies, and VMs.

But PMs are a one minute wait, and VMs are 45sec. Surely there's an option somewhere?

And a decrease for supporters would be evil :| It's an inconvenience to all members, and some of us can't donate.

 

[Melody]

I agree that the delay could be lowered or bypassed by supporters, because the act of donating, can become your bond that says "I won't abuse PC in that way"

As for the supporters-only isn't fair argument, sorry, that's life. Life is never fair.

 

[Nick]

I agree that the delay could be lowered or bypassed by supporters, because the act of donating, can become your bond that says "I won't abuse PC in that way"

As for the supporters-only isn't fair argument, sorry, that's life. Life is never fair.

Though it's likely nothing's going to change with it, based on what Steve said, I don't like the idea of making supporters wait less compared to everyone else or donating and having that donation act as a bond that says that someone won't abuse the system. You don't donate for that; you donate to help the community out financially in ways others can't. It just seems like you're suggesting it as a perk and that just doesn't seem like something that should be a perk for supporters and not for anyone else. It's like saying supporters are people you can trust compared to normal members and that's not true at all considering how many supporters end up getting banned in the long run.

Life may not be fair, but PokéCommunity tries to be as fair as it can be towards members, supporters, staff, etc. Just because you support the community at one time or another financially shouldn't give you more trust (which is what the flood limit comes down to) over members who don't donate. After all, most of the members who donate didn't donate through their own funds but through their parents' funds. And from what I've come to know, they donated for the perks and not to support the community, which is rather unfortunate for them. But again, life may not be fair, but PC is. And that's not exactly how PC functions when it comes to deciding things like that.