Whatever it is, I think one of the guests may have broken it. I won’t name the person, but damn 62.something/day in two days? I recall reading that Roland Deschain was running a tally of 50+ for a little while.
Damn, that’s a lot of posts.
This’ll come as a serious shock to those who’ve been hanging around MPSIMS for a while, but I’ve done 100 in a day, and I’m not the only one.
Damn. That’s a lot more posts.
It was not I.
Sure as hell wasn’t me. I don’t think I’ve ever have that much to say in a given day.
Wow. Did I read 14K something there? I’m humbled.
I probably did or came close to it during the Winter of 2002/2003. Many Cafe and MSPIMUS threads at that time were more like IM conversations than MB postings.
So, even tho I’ve had weeks of no posting at all during out of town jobs or vacations, I still have a very high PPD even now. Right around the Winter of 02/03, though, I was in the 20s as an ave.
It’s not at all hard to do. Besides those conversation type threads, there are some days that you might find several threads to comment on. Then, add in replies to replies or narrowing the focus type posts and well… yeah, a person can post a bunch in one or a few days. Maintaining anything higher than a Guin or QED type 25PPD over the long term, tho, would be difficult, I would think.
I’m willing to bet that Handy must have topped that at some point.
As a general rule, when the number of posts someone makes in a day (“Y”) exceeds a certain limit I shall call “X” (approximately 20), the amount of actual intellectual contribution made to the board becomes inversely proportional to the daily post count number exceeding X. When Y is big enough, the intellectual contribution made becomes negative. 
In other words, someone like handy only serves to make the board a dumber place.
Or to make it more current, replace ‘handy’ with ‘Guinastasia’. o_O
Even posters likeEve have reported suffering from fatigue of this kind, where the quality of posts is affected negatively by sheer quantity. Flirting threads are another prime example of negative intellectual contribution, though it may be argued that there’s no need to read them.