Seeing a dodgy thread in the Pit, I did my duty and clicked the REPORT button to alert a mod. Then I went back into the thread to post that it had indeed been reported, only to be told that I had to WAIT 60 SECONDS between posts.
a) Is reporting a thread/post itself considered a post?
b) When was this feature installed?
c) Why is it necessary to have to wait 60 seconds anyway?
Cheers
Somewhat new change. Write the “reported” post first then report. No delay.
Thread bombing
Thanks for that running coach. Hey, I beat you to it this time! 
Has thread bombing ever been a problem here? I mean, I get that potentially it COULD be an issue, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen it.
I believe that forcing a wait between posts has always been enabled here. That wait isn’t anything new. It is done basically for flood control.
What is new is that last year, someone noticed that it was possible to report a PM. However, that report didn’t go anywhere useful and none of us mods would ever get that report, so the feature was essentially broken. Now, whenever a post is reported or a PM is reported, a post is generated in a forum that only we moderators have access to, which logs the event. We check that forum frequently for PM reports, and mods can now also see what is happening in forums that they don’t moderate if they want to look through the reports.
So now, since August of 2014, any time you report a post, a hidden post is generated. This post counts as a post as far as the flood control is concerned, so now you have to wait 60 seconds before you can make another post. Prior to that, you could report a post and could then immediately make another post since there was no hidden post generated.
The 60 second flood control was there before that, though. It wouldn’t show up when you reported posts, but it would show up if you tried to post two posts within 60 seconds.
It takes most people longer than 60 seconds to type out a post, so most people never notice it. It takes a lot less than 60 seconds to just type “reported” though, so when people post a report and then try to post “reported” in the thread, that’s when they most notice it.
As running coach said, if you do the “reported” post first, the software doesn’t prevent you from reporting the post immediately after that. And he should know. Most of us mods suspect that he has the reported button hotkeyed on his keyboard somewhere. 
See, the rule works.
And so does my tiger-repelling rock. :rolleyes:
OK, I admit the threat of crapflooding is real, although I’d assume anyone dumb enough to do it would richly deserve the immediate and summary justice they’re have dispensed to them. But yeah, the delay between reporting a thread and posting that you’ve reported a thread (or vice versa – it’s the same anti-flood timer) is annoying, considering both actions are part and parcel of a good thread or post report.
I don’t think it was always there, though. I seem to remember that, years ago, it was relatively common for people to accidentally post the same thing twice in a row, maybe by double-clicking the “Submit Reply” button. I’ve always assumed the 60-second wait was implemented to prevent that.
Which reminds me… (going maybe slightly off-topic)… why do I see double-posts once in a while? It’s jarring, and I have to fight down the impulse to call out the poster, but almost certainly it’s not intentional or even accidental on the part of any action the poster took… especially given the 60-second delay. Is this a situation where the server and the DB hiccup? Kinda like just before the Matrix is altered and the Agents appear.
In the rare case it happened to me, I actually submitted, didn’t think it went through (as it didn’t refresh) and so submitted again. Usually the software will notice a duplicate, but it didn’t that time.
Now, when a post seems like it might not have gone through, I always reopen the thread and refresh to see if my post made it before resubmitting.
Perhaps 3 or 4 times in the past 10 years, I have logged on and seen the first page of GQ ruined by spam…completely taken over by 50 almost-identical threads from a site offering mail-order-brides from India. Those threads then magically disappeared a few minutes later. I assumed that there was a human-being-style-mod doing his job. But if a simple software fix like the 60 second rule can do the job more efficiently, then I’m fine with that. I can’t type a post in less than 60 seconds, anyway.
No decent post can possibly be done in less than sixty seconds. One liners and so called “humor” responses might, but they contribute little, and the 60 second rule could be extended to 300 seconds, and it would only improve the board.
Let’s go for a full 10 minutes between posts. :rolleyes:
Wouldn’t effect me at all.
A few people around here (e.g. Vinyl Turnip) are pretty darn good at them.
I had either forgotten (or never knew about) the 60-second cooling-off period until the recent Mafia Game. It’s not unusual to want a flurry of posts a few minutes before Lynch deadline.
The result would probably have been the same, and it looks like Town may pull out a victory anyway, but if not … I’m blaming you! 
A decent “Reported for (forum change|spam|random good reason to report a post)” followed by actually submitting a Report is a legitimate reason to submit two posts in less than 60 seconds.
True. And does NOT fall afoul of the 60 second limit as implemented.
Only if you post “REPORTED” and then report the post (as suggested by running coach) I came unstuck doing it the other way 'round.
Technically, posting you have reported a post, before you actually have, is against the user agreement.