It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Flood Control - Is it time to revisit this policy?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 11:40 AM
I have never posted here, but am assuming this is the place where those in the know and the PTB repsond to member questions and suggestions. (I do not want to send one of those u2u's out the burdens all the Mods inboxes.)

Is flood control for everyone really necessary? Would you barraged by spammers if it was not in place? Or is it overly protective?

I would like to suggest that you guys consider lifting FC for Members who have shown that they are responsible and able to have mature dialogues. Perhaps there could be a high-bar for points and/or number of posts req.

It is a hardship when you are an active member here and are corresponding with a number of people. And also serves, to potentially create a scenario where you forget to repsond to people, or take so long doing it that they get offended...

I know it sounds a little silly, but I don't understand why it need to be in place for 100% of the community al the time.


posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 09:45 PM
I agree that the flood control is way too touchy. I find myself being shut off by the flood control even when I'm only conversing with a single person.

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by TheWayISeeIt

I agree, TWISI.

It does get a tad annoying when you have to wait several minutes between sending u2us.

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 10:51 PM
reply to post by skeptic1

Thanks for chiming in guys. It realize it seems a bit petty on the heels of the "Drug Wars", but think it is worth asking about. It would add to the community aspect, IMO, and would reduce the stress of logging in and seeing more than two u2u's in your inbox.

That wonderful burgundy/orange-yellowish light should only bring joy to us.

Well, at least those of who are not mods... for them I suspect it is a burden. Hence me posting here instead of sending one to all of them.

I know, right? My generosity knows no bounds...

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 10:58 PM
I know that if you put in your yahoo, aim, msn addresses on your profile, a button will appear at the bottom of your posts that link to those.

Then you could use one of the other free chat progs that dont have flood control. No fuss, no muss.

My .02


posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 11:16 PM
There are certain people on ATS whom I'd rather not be contacted by outside of ATS. A good example would be the gonad who left a message in my comment section a few months ago calling me lame for no explicable reason.

I really don't want juveniles like that to be contacting me on AIM or Yahoo just because they have some beef with my evil, evil views on ATS. On the other hand, I like to have conversations with the folks I do get along with, and the flood control makes it difficult.

posted on Mar, 4 2009 @ 11:18 PM
We thank you for sharing your ideas with the intent of making ATS a better more user friendly place. The staff and owners do appreciate member feedback and have always considered your thoughts and wishes when making changes to the board. So thank you for caring so much about this community that you created this thread.

By keeping all member suggestions in one place it allows staff and owners the ability to quickly and thoroughly access all member recommendations when considering board changes. Otherwise many suggestions will be very difficult to locate considering the size of this board.

Understanding the above, we would appreciate it if you would add your thoughts/recommendations to the official thread dedicated to members suggestions for board change.

ATS, BTS, What would you like to see in the future?

Thanks for your contributions and understanding. I will now close this thread for the reasons stated above.

ATS Staff


new topics

top topics


log in