so if there were a limit on front page posts, what should it be? June 21, 2000 8:51 PM   Subscribe

so if there were a limit on front page posts, what should it be? 1? 3? 5? no limit?
posted by mathowie (staff) to Etiquette/Policy at 8:51 PM (18 comments total)

If you ask me, I think one post from a member a day is plenty....

It will also give them an opportunity to really think about the topic being a "worthwhile discussion" for the group (in the context that they "only have one shot at this").

That's my two cents.
posted by EricBrooksDotCom at 11:52 PM on June 21, 2000

Personally, I agree with Eric and think it should be limited to one front page post per person per day.

Although, in a similiar vein to Bryan, perhaps a time limit to when someone can post their next front page link would be ok as long as people do not have the ability to post one front page link after the other.

posted by jay at 1:53 AM on June 22, 2000

posted by baylink at 7:32 AM on June 22, 2000

Baylink, dude... please don't take this as a shot at you. I actually like some of your finds, and had plenty of other people in mind on this subject. There *are* other people that do that too.

Jeez now *they're* gonna start with me because I'm trying to spare your feelings...thanks a *lot*... :0)
posted by EricBrooksDotCom at 8:09 AM on June 22, 2000

I'd say two posts per day, to give everyone a little bit of wiggle room. If everyone was limited to one, they might not post in the mornings for fear they'd find something better later in the day. And I think the fact that there is a limit (which puts a premium on front-page postings) will have more impact on posting patterns than the actual number you're limited to.
posted by wiremommy at 8:29 AM on June 22, 2000

I agree with the one per day limit. When something is limited, in theory, it becomes more valuable. Hopefully, it will make people consider what they are posting, as well as giving others a chance to post as well.

I think, if not a technical nightmare, that it is a fine idea.
posted by thinkdink at 11:10 AM on June 22, 2000

Wow. I'm convinced. Ok, I'll contradict myearlier argument. I think the single post per day idea is fine. I was concerned about compromising the open posting principle, but this doesn't, really.
posted by lbergstr at 12:29 PM on June 22, 2000

Except to the extent that limiting the number of posts to the front page has a chilling effect on discussion overall. The next level of critique I can see coming is "How can he think that's important enough to use as his one post?" "Can't people find better stuff to use their one post on?" And it doesn't even begin to address ramblings-on further down the thread, which I stop reading when I'm tired of them. They eventually die anyway as new stuff is posted.

The whole direction of this discussion is worrisome but predictable. Those who like it the way it ends up will stay, those who don't will leave. Duh.
posted by elgoose at 3:29 PM on June 22, 2000

I still like the way things are now. It's not like I'm being overwhelmed by the volume. Once membership gets up to 100,000 it will be a problem, but at that point even one post a day would be too much.

Is this really broken?
posted by y6y6y6 at 4:02 PM on June 22, 2000

I hate the idea of limits. I think it's limiting.


So, I guess if I ever build a community weblog or something, I won't have them. Matt - you should do what you think is the best thing. I love MeFi and I hope I'll love it in future incarnations.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 4:25 PM on June 22, 2000

I vote for the one post per day. That doesn't make it any less open, IMHO. It will, probably, make it better. To me, open <> free for all.
posted by Calebos at 8:58 PM on June 22, 2000

No limits. Look - even if you limit it to one post per day, right now there is the capacity for more than 1K posts in a day (from all users). A per person limit won't significantly affect volume as the number of posters continues to grow.
posted by plinth at 6:13 AM on June 23, 2000

Two links per day seems right to me. If we limit ppl to just one, we might start seeing a bunch of unrelated things in one post, like the quickies at slashdot -- not a terrible thing, but not terribly conducive to discussion... especially flat discussion (as opposed to threaded) like MeFi has.
posted by sudama at 8:15 AM on June 23, 2000

I'm still not convinced that it's broke enough to fix. So a few specific individuals have gone post-crazy on a handful of occasions. If you have issues with that, I think that the first step would be to take it up in private with the guilty parties. A few words in the posting guidelines might also be less likely to ruffle feathers than a technological fix. I vote for no hard limit.

(Personally, I have more issues with the length than the number of front-page posts, but I'll wait until I'm a bit more cool-headed to discuss the matter.)
posted by harmful at 11:42 AM on June 23, 2000

On second thought, a relatively high posting limit (5 or 6, perhaps) might be useful, not so much as a limit on active participation, but as a defense against malicious attack. (Not that the MeFi community has ticked anybody off recently, or anything.)

No, I'm not paranoid. That's just a vicious rumor being spread by my enemies.
posted by harmful at 2:03 PM on June 23, 2000

though I never post, I'm throwing in my two cents... Lots of good stuff comes up here, and perhaps just the presence of a discussion such as this will make people think before they go post-mad. Sudama has a good point...if posts are limited to one or two a day, people will try to shove as much as they can into one post, making it difficult for focused discussions thereafter. As well, i do think that people would sit on their hands waiting to make sure something "better" didn't come up before posting, turning mefi into an afternoon or evening only phenomenon -- and perhaps over time, a community that dies due to non-participation...we can't wait *all* day...
posted by Ms Snit at 11:49 AM on June 29, 2000

What's excessive? What bothers most people? Two posts from one person is hardly noticable. Four posts in one day is a bit more noticable and would probably annoy more people. Putting a limit of two or three sounds like a fair compromise. I'd also suggest there be no limit to the MetaTalk, which might encourage more people to at least check that half of the place out.

Comments aren't gonna get a limit are they?
posted by ZachsMind at 3:00 PM on July 2, 2000

I don't know if I'll ever post to Mefi, probably. Not even if I find something I’m sure is worthwhile.

There seems to be a few people who are openly hostile to rediscussion of some concepts lately. I first came across this place a couple of months ago (I don’t even remember how or why anymore), and the mix of look-what-I-found and where-do-people-stand-on-this seemed really cool. I liked the layout, and the arguments, whether inane or academic or whatever.

But lately, well, is it just me, or has there been a lot of ill will because, oh, someone happened to not read every single post of the last few months and missed something, or inadvertently breached etiquette and tried to apologize and got re-flamed all over again.

Or whatever.

Anyways, I’ve found one or two (not 40 or 50, no really) items I think are pretty cool or worthy of discussion (and to which I have no affiliation, and which I’m pretty sure are completely new), but why would I waste my time (and all of yours) getting flamed because someone doesn’t like the way I posted?

And why does the we’ve-covered-this-already rule apply some times (like, say, the speed of light discussion), and not others (Napster funnies, Survivor, Kottke [whoever he is])?

An extra link is two or three lines of text on the front page. I don’t really see the big deal.

Sorry this post is too long.

posted by chicobangs at 3:29 PM on July 20, 2000

« Older Kottke Critiques Online Discussion   |   Future of weblogs? (Posted 06/22/00) Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments