Hey all, this isn’t a post to complain about the limit but rather a prompt for discussion.
I ran into the post limit today when throwing some content up. I completely understand the need for a limit, otherwise you could have bots posting shit all over the place. But, it is a bit frustrating for a use case like mine.
I often, after work is done for the day, sit on my back patio and go through my RSS reader to get the daily news. I decided that when I found an article worth sharing I would throw it up on lemmy. I really like this site after coming from reddit. But it feels as though, with the current smaller user base, that there simply isn’t a lot of engagement due to the trickle of content currently. I was worried about people thinking I was “spamming”, but figured the increase of content would be worth the risk of a slap on the wrist. Thus, my burst of posting hit the 5 per hour limit.
I’m wondering if it’s possible to set certain users with an elevated set of permissions that would allow someone to go from a limit of 5 per hour to something like X posts per day. These individuals can be thought of as “ambassadors”, or something more accurate because I can’t think of a good name right now. Basically, individuals who have shown not to abuse the system, and in return can provide more content to the site.
I understand that the bursty nature of my posting is a bit of an edge case, but thought it was worth discussing. It would be nice if I didn’t have to save a bunch of articles and come back every hour to post 5 at a time :)
I think this is a thoughtful point to discuss. One imagines that as everything scales, the pros and cons of it all will shift. However, as things are, it seems like more content is good for Lemmy. 5/hour/community seems reasonable to me, as /u/nutomic is suggesting. An effect is that if an overall limit were tied to downvoting, a bursty actor would be spreading their 5/hour across more communities, giving a wider audience a chance to weigh in.
/u/dietcokke The rate limiting can work off of any time frame. I just kinda chose 5 posts / hour arbitrarily to keep out spammers, but it could be increased to something like 20 / day, or 10 / hour… pretty much anything.
I understand. I did like the idea of 5/community/hr. That does feel a little more scalable. Or having an increased amount of posting, but limiting if your recent posts start going negative. I don’t necessarily want to have things changed simply because it suits me. But I did think it was a good discussion to have.
yeah I think having a 5 per community and a larger limit overall because I want to help make this site more active but its hard when I can only post a couple times
I’ll up to 10 / hour for now.
Thanks for increasing it. I went on a burst posting spree this morning and didn’t have any problems. It seems that 10/hr is about the magic number for me as far as being able to read multiple articles, and decide that I actually want to put one up.
nice, so great to have active and caring admins
deleted by creator
I’m trying to avoid any “reputation-based” system in lemmy, not just for this one specifically, but for things in general. I don’t want what happened to stackoverflow and wikipedia, to happen here for example.
Fair enough. Someday the psychohistorians will study what karma did to the brain…
deleted by creator
They’re completely controlled by a few power users with high reputation, and basically gated communities now. Very unwelcome to new users, new contributions, etc.
I agree that Wikipedia’s system can be very restrictive to new users. However, I am curious what your thoughts are on their system of “autoconfirmed” users? I’m asking specifically about the part where new users accounts are limited for a few days after creation and then they gain “regular” privileges.
It’s not a perfect approach but it is a way to help curb spammers with minimal interference to regular users.
It could be something like for the first 4 days after registration you can only post 5/hr and then after that your limit is raised to 10 an hour or something.
Not sure if it’s worth the engineering effort but just throwing it out there. Hope to see this community grow!
I’d rather not have a tiered system / any priviledge based system. But when private communities come, then they’ll be able to be closed off and not viewable / have limited interaction with uninvited users.
There is evidence that such systems will subconsciously mould users into the site’s hive mind (and even just using social media can be enough to do that, having a reputation based activity limit will just make it worse). Not good.
I completely agree that any system in place should be automatic. Having individuals involved does lead to some issues, worst of all being favoritism or mild corruption (the introduction of some kind of inner circle).
I do like the idea of linking posting limit to a negative posting value. It would allow users the power to be able to limit someone who is posting bad or inflammatory content. Though that does lead to a potential for “brigading”, users intentionally going through and downvoting content they disagree with (even if it abides by site/community rules), in order to silence an individual. But, as long as the ability to post isn’t completely removed without human intervention it could work.
Maybe we should change the limit to 5 posts per hour and community. And a higher limit for posts per hour overall. Not sure if that would be a good idea.
