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 :)
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.
This got me thinking. Maybe the post limit should be systematically applied to users if certain conditions are met. For example:
If a user posts more than X times an hour, and most posts have a negative score, apply a limit of 5 posts an hour that last for a certain amount of time.
If a system like this is ever to be implemented, I personally think it should be 100% automatic, with no exceptions. Once humans get to decide what’s potentially spam or not, you could run into issues.
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…
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.
