A suggestion regarding "Multiple posts in a row"

[hosseinimr93]

I usually report multiple posts that are made by a user in a row.
But sometimes I don't report them because they are old posts not worth moderators time or they have gotten some replies.

Why should a user be able to make multiple posts?
I think they should get a error like this:
The last post of this thread has been made by you. Please edit that post.

In the case the post hasn't been made in the last 24 hours and the poster is the topic starter. (The purpose is bumping)
The last post of this thread has been made by you. Please edit the last post. You can also delete that post and make a new one.

[1714124606]

1714124606

[1714124606]

1714124606

[1714124606]

1714124606

[1714124606]

1714124606

[1714124606]

1714124606

[1714124606]

1714124606

[webtricks]

Making multiple posts in a row is not always spam.
When I create a thread and have to reply to 3-4 people at once who replied on my thread, I usually create two continuous posts. Things look smoother that way.
Well, whenever you feel like someone is spamming by making continuous posts, just report them. That's the best solution. No matter posts are old or new. I have seen people getting banned for posts made in 2015-16.

[hosseinimr93]

When I create a thread and have to reply to 3-4 people at once who replied on my thread, I usually create two continuous posts. Things look smoother that way.

As far as I know this is against the rules. You should reply all of them in one post.
In my opinion, the best thing you can do is to separate them using by a line.

Well, whenever you feel like someone is spamming by making continuous posts, just report them. That's the best solution. No matter posts are old or new. I have seen people getting banned for posts made in 2015-16.

I don't think a user is banned due to multiple posts made in 2015-16. At least I am sure they don't get permanent ban. Those users have likely been banned due to plagiarism. 

[Lucius]

hosseinimr93, I wouldn't mind that we have such an option on the forum, this would certainly prevent a good portion of users to violate forum rules, which would automatically mean fewer reports and less work for moderators.

In most cases, I see such behavior from new users (multiple posts in a row) when they reply to others, but instead of using the option multiple-quote, they make a new post for each reply. However, there are some who simply use this to increase posts number.

We have a rule for that, but some forum users do not read the rules, or intentionally enforce some of their rules.

32. Posting multiple posts in a row (excluding bumps and reserved posts by the thread starter) is not allowed.

[Welsh]

Its more to check for the forum, and its not a massive issue for moderators to deal with these types of reports. These are probably one of the least complex reports we get, and can quickly handle them compared to other issues like plagiarism which requires source checking etc.

The thing is with this suggestion, users still like to bump their threads, and this would prevent them from doing that, because it would require them to delete their previous reply, which isn't convenient as discussion can be lost. As long as the bump is later deleted there should be no problems.  

If a user has made several posts in a row, but it contains useful information I tend to message them, and let them know the latest one has been deleted, and they should edit that into their reply rather than posting a new post. As I try, and avoid editing users posts directly as much as I can.

[marlboroza]

If a user has made several posts in a row, but it contains useful information I tend to message them, and let them know the latest one has been deleted, and they should edit that into their reply rather than posting a new post.

In that case moderator could merge posts instead removing them but I guess that is on moderator who is handling report.

Making multiple posts in a row is not always spam.
When I create a thread and have to reply to 3-4 people at once who replied on my thread, I usually create two continuous posts. Things look smoother that way.

It is not spam, but imagine if everyone start doing this, for example you reply to few users in 2 posts then another user (lets call them Bob) creates 2 post to reply to your 2 posts then third user replies to your 2 posts and 2 Bob's post making 4 posts in the row and then fourth user reply to everyone creating 8 consecutive posts.

[Welsh]

If a user has made several posts in a row, but it contains useful information I tend to message them, and let them know the latest one has been deleted, and they should edit that into their reply rather than posting a new post.

Usually they're edited into one, although a personal preference is I don't like editing too many users posts even if its just adding content that they've already posted. A few users can be a little concerned about having their posts edited by a moderator even if no content was removed, and it was simply just combining the multiple posts into one. So, sometimes I opt to message the user instead, and delete the multiple posts.

No doubt, other moderators will be less concerned about combing posts using the edit function, but this is my personal preference.

[LoyceMobile]

I often break this rule. Not when I'm replying to multiple posts (I edit them all into one), but for these reasons:
1. A post reaches the maximum of 64kB and I have more to add.
2. I'm adding new information to an existing topic after a while. I could copy the last post and add it to my new post, but that feels like cheating my signature campaign (because I've "used" that post already and it doesn't feel right to get paid for the same information again).
3. My last post in the topic was merited and I want to keep it as a reference.

I often report posts that break this rule too, so I'm glad moderators don't strictly enforce this rule all the time.

[hosseinimr93]

I often break this rule. Not when I'm replying to multiple posts (I edit them all into one), but for these reasons:
1. A post reaches the maximum of 64kB and I have more to add.
2. I'm adding new information to an existing topic after a while. I could copy the last post and add it to my new post, but that feels like cheating my signature campaign (because I've "used" that post already and it doesn't feel right to get paid for the same information again).
3. My last post in the topic was merited and I want to keep it as a reference.

I often report posts that break this rule too, so I'm glad moderators don't strictly enforce this rule all the time.

I have seen your multiple posts and I have never reported them. In all three cases you mentioned, you have acceptable reason for making multiple posts. So, we should have some exceptions if such a feature is added.
At least users should get a warning before making multiple posts like what users get for making posts in threads that are inactive for more than 120 days.

[Welsh]

I often report posts that break this rule too, so I'm glad moderators don't strictly enforce this rule all the time.

Context is almost always considered. Hence the reason the rules aren't black, and white. It allows for moderators discretion, and there are times when posting multiple posts in a row is acceptable in my opinion. Other times it just makes it easier to condense that information into one.

[theymos]

I've considered that before, but it raises several questions:
 - Although bumps every 24 hours are allowed by the unofficial rules, should they be allowed? Bump posts are worthless on their own, and their existence is really a dirty hack. The modified bumping system on some boards is a better model, but doesn't fit all boards.
 - Although "reserved" posts are allowed by the unofficial rules, do they actually serve any real purpose? I tend to think that their only legitimate purpose is to allow for future expansion past the 64k limit (which is kind of lame to begin with), and 95% of the time they end up being useless in that respect.
 - Especially when several hours separates two posts, multiposting can sometimes be the natural flow of the conversation. For example, if some news has happened since your last post, it'd be natural to make a new post rather than editing the old one.

The purposes of the unofficial rule are:
 1. Prevent excessive bumping, which is unfair to other topics.
 2. Prevent people from monopolizing pages of topics, which is unfair to other posters.
 3. Prevent padding of postcounts and similar, which is basically spam.

Quite often, a person will multipost without having any of that abuse in mind. In these cases, it causes unnecessary friction when their posts are deleted; they feel as though they are being persecuted by mods, or like someone is reporting them for this kind of "parking violation" as a way of attacking them. But we can't look inside a user's mind, so it's difficult to determine "legit multiposting" from possible abuse, and it's easy to err on the side of just deleting it and telling them to consolidate their posts. Not ideal, though.

I've been thinking that a more ideal solution would be:
 - Get rid of the unofficial rule.
 - Prevent posts within 24 hours from bumping the topic, which addresses purpose #1.
 - Prevent posts from being made when the poster has made more than 3 of the topic's last 6 posts in the last 24 hours (or something like that), addressing purpose #2.
 - Only allow one post in a thread to count toward post-counts per 24 hours, and perhaps hide/limit signatures in the excess posts as well, addressing purpose #3.
 
I think that the first three would be fairly easy to implement, but the last is more difficult. Also, it'd be nice to get rid of the 64k limit, but that's also difficult to implement.

The status quo is not terrible, so the matter is low on my to-do list.

[The-One-Above-All]

Making multiple posts in a row is not always spam.
When I create a thread and have to reply to 3-4 people at once who replied on my thread, I usually create two continuous posts. Things look smoother that way.
Well, whenever you feel like someone is spamming by making continuous posts, just report them. That's the best solution. No matter posts are old or new. I have seen people getting banned for posts made in 2015-16.

I agree with this and often you can do it by mistake , you make one post, see another person has replied and naturally just press reply to them with their quote makes it easier to read. Or you have to scan a really large post with lots of replies to lots of people and find the @ x user to locate the reply.

Then again I guess can be abused to keep pushing your thread to the top all of the time.

[webtricks]

I've considered that before, but it raises several questions:
 - Although bumps every 24 hours are allowed by the unofficial rules, should they be allowed? Bump posts are worthless on their own, and their existence is really a dirty hack. The modified bumping system on some boards is a better model, but doesn't fit all boards.

Although I agree to everything you said in your post, I differ on this one. Bumping is backbone of every forum especially when we have sections like 'Services'.
No question that bumping was manipulatively used in sections like 'Bounties', 'Tokens', etc. but in threads like 'Services' or 'Goods' where everyone is trying to buy/sell something valuable (or maybe not), '24 hours per bump' is fair rule and promotes equality.

[hosseinimr93]

I've considered that before, but it raises several questions:

Some users have legitimate purpose for making multiple posts. Sometimes a best thing a user can do is to make a new post. But there are some newbies aren't aware of rules and that's why they make multiple posts.
So, what about displaying a warning message like this?

Warning: The last post of this topic has been made by you.
Unless you are sure making a new post is needed, please consider editing the previous post.
If you are quoting multiple posts, please quote all of them in a single post.

I am sure this warning can reduce multiple posts.

[Danydee]

 No, I'm not completely with you

 I'll confess, that from the day I'm in this forum, I don't like the way wich your posts can be deleted just because they're successives


  There is some cases, Imagine you want to SHOW that you aren't telling the things in a one single time,
 Or you gonna add a post after 12 or 20 hours passed. you go edit your post, and what, you add the hour and the date of your edit ??

 The new version of the forum with the new functionalities given to the moderators, is just perfect as is. no need for other thing!

[TECSHARE]

A warning that you are multi-posting like there is when new posts have been made while you are typing a reply, I think would be a great way to help reduce multi-posting but not inhibit use significantly.

[Danydee]

A warning that you are multi-posting like there is when new posts have been made while you are typing a reply, I think would be a great way to help reduce multi-posting but not inhibit use significantly.

Trust me nobody keeps the habit of multi-posting, after 1 / 2 interventions from the moderator, he's changing the way.

[TECSHARE]

A warning that you are multi-posting like there is when new posts have been made while you are typing a reply, I think would be a great way to help reduce multi-posting but not inhibit use significantly.

Trust me nobody keeps the habit of multi-posting, after 1 / 2 interventions from the moderator, he's changing the way.

Obviously, but the idea is to reduce the need for moderator intervention in the first place. Most of the multi-posts I see are often a result of people clicking quote reply to multiple replies and forgetting to combine them in to one post. This reminder might be useful as I think people often do this just spacing out and don't think to combine them.

[sandy-is-fine]

Just as something to look at for ideas MACRUMORS dot COM forum software automatically combines individual multiple posts as well multiple quoted posts (which at times can be quite annoying and makes it hard to follow threads).

[SFR10]

The modified bumping system on some boards is a better model, but doesn't fit all boards.

Would it be possible to have a slightly modified bumping system for Services or other similar boards?
- Reason behind my request ^{[this is just my case, I can cite other examples as well]}:

• I'm participating in a campaign that happens to use a bot for its counter and that bot literally counts everything ^{[It isn't fair if I try to bump my threads]}.
• I prefer to not create another throwaway account with the sole purpose of bumping my threads.

I've been thinking that a more ideal solution would be:

I agree with all of them...

- Only allow one post in a thread to count toward post-counts per 24 hours, and perhaps hide/limit signatures in the excess posts as well, addressing purpose #3.

Since you're trying to prevent spam and most users that are part of it, happen to be a campaign ^[signature] participant then you should also consider hiding these posts on "Show the last posts of this person." page...

• Without hiding it on the page that I mentioned, this will only work for campaigns that use bots to count posts or those so-called managers that only count posts ^{[regardless of it being eligible or not]} based on the number shown in our profiles.

IMHO, we need both of theymos and hosseinimr93's suggestions ^{[in order to see a significant change in results]}.