Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 2:45:15 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

A better solution is for SI to add an 'ignore' option whereby replies to ignored users are also ignored. Not perfect. Better would be (even primitive) threading functionality.

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 2:48:04 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 275872

okay...you win...i will cut back...i luv irony

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 3:10:59 PM
From: overhols	Respond to of 275872

I am a long time lurker and occasional poster, and I second Magrathea's proposal. I think it would be beneficial to the thread, and that it would have a very minimal impact on individual posters. I think 10-15 posts per day would be a good number. The thread has a plethora of content rich posters. I don't think that a smaller number of well thought out, content rich posts will harm the thread in any way. We may find that it enhances things greatly. I am too busy these days to reply to any further discussion of this topic, (new job), but I wanted to post my opinion for what it is worth. Regards, Kyle

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 3:59:14 PM
From: cruzbay	Respond to of 275872

Agreed. Heck, it's hard to imagine how any individual could exceed ten posts a day and still be contributing any meaningful content. When I do post and am reminded that I have "limited posting privileges and 100 posts remaining today", I find it comical.

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 5:06:11 PM
From: niceguy767	Respond to of 275872

I think that Doug should refrain from posting under a full moon ;-) (Couldn't resist it, Doug...No malice intended!)

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/8/2006 7:07:16 PM
From: j3pflynn	Respond to of 275872

Magrathea - It may not be do-able, but it'd work for me. Yeesh! I had no idea I was so high up on the list! Wakeup call for me!

To: Magrathea who wrote (204695)	7/10/2006 6:38:39 PM
From: Rink	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Magrathea, re: Put a speed limit in the forum rules somewhere between 10 and 25. I think 15 is a good number. If you can't add all you need to say in a forum in 15 posts per day, you just are not trying. Someone exceeds the speed limit repeatedly, give them a warning. If they continue, give them a vacation. I might also suggest some limit on the percentage of posts, say under 20%. It may be a free forum, but we should avoid a "tragedy of the commons". Post these limits in the rules. They at least have the advantage of being objective unlike proposals regarding repeated content. Violators should be warned, repeated violators shall be given a suspension to go cold turkey. Well I don't care about the amount of posts an sich. It becomes a problem when they're mainly insulting / sarcastic / repetitive / off topic / disingenious / etc... Not enough to get banned for right away under the current rules, but enough to lower the value of the board drastically. So I'm not going to implement it as a hard limit. I think a couple of us will break it e.g. on earnings day. We should have some freedom here as long as the value of the board isn't lowered too significantly. This poses the problem of what to add to the 15 posts limit in order to only get people banned when they lower the value of the board. All solutions I can think of are too complex and too subjective. So far I think forget it, just make the main rules work. Regards, Rink Attachment of some brainstorm thoughts of adding subrules to make this 15 post limit rule work (too complex, too subjective): - Add sub rule that 3 of the 15 posts must lower the value of the board (insulting/repetative/malicious/off topic etc..) - Add sub rule that at a net minimum of 3 persons support the enforcement of the 15 post limit rule via a short quick vote (one of the persons should be me because of the first subjective sub rule). A net minimum is the amount of persons voting for enforcing the rule minus the persons that vote against it (excluding the poster in question). - I think a short cool off for a lesser offence compared to the main rules will mostly do fine. I propose two days, a week, two weeks, a month, permanent. The main weakness is in the first sub rule. It's subjective. I will need the trust of the vast majority here in order to maintain it. There's other weaknesses too: Possibly more net OT's because of voting.