On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Michael Snow <wikipe...@verizon.net>wrote:
> Ryan Lomonaco wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com > >wrote: > > > >> Another possibility would be imposing a throttle on replies > >> to threads, e.g. 5 per thread per day. > >> > > That's something that I think might have merit, although it's one of > those > > things that's tough to set as a hard-and-fast rule because of time zone > > differences. > > > I think the better approach is what the moderators have occasionally > done in the past, which is to kill a specific thread. And the rest of us > can call out those threads as being worthless, as several people have > done, or ignore them (Thomas Dalton is right about that at least). But I > expect throttling threads would be counterproductive. The beneficial > effect of the current moderation is that it creates space for a more > inclusive discussion, by restraining "post-early-and-often" behavior. A > per-thread throttle would create an incentive to encourage that > behavior, by privileging those who are quickest to respond. > > --Michael Snow > My reading of it was X replies per person per day in each thread. I agree with you that there should not be a set limit per thread as a whole. -- [[User:Ral315]] _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
