-
Please take a moment to look over the Suggestions & Feedback rules before making a post: READ RULES HERE
Private Message Wait Time
- Thread starter lanbo
- Start date
D
Deleted member 81315
Guest
Yes I think this should be an option for people over a certain amount of posts.
antichrist
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2012
- 1,954
- 2,632
I also agree
muscleteen
Power Member
- Oct 28, 2008
- 679
- 1,074
The delay is artificial, and it's there for a reason.
- Jun 23, 2010
- 2,141
- 5,063
Yes, and thats to prevent PM spam from 1 post wonders. I don't see how lifting or reducing the wait time for established members ( ex. if post count > x ; no wait time) would cause any harm.
muscleteen
Power Member
- Oct 28, 2008
- 679
- 1,074
In my humble opinion, I would say that it's there to prevent PM spam. Period.
It's not very hard to raise one's post count to x if one is planning to PM spam a $497 piece of software (or even a $10 plugin for that matter, since one will be reaching out to thousands of members).
- Jun 23, 2010
- 2,141
- 5,063
From the work I've seen the staff put in, I believe it will be very difficult to spam 1k posts in a short amount of time without getting the banhammer. Post count spamming is easy to spot. Post count > 1000 + X years of membership + implementing a wait period if PMs exceed XX amounts of PM under an hr should be reasonable measures that likely won't result in PM spam.
muscleteen
Power Member
- Oct 28, 2008
- 679
- 1,074
Yup, and decreasing PM delays will only increase their workload...
If I knew I would be spamming a $497 product, I would make sure I fly under the radar. It's pretty easy to do. Many members do it already and do not get banned because technically, they are not violating any of the forum rules (even though they are not really contributing anything of value to the forum).
(To really paint the picture: I wouldn't be posting "Thank you for this post!", but "My thanks button is broken :-( Didn't know about this method. Your posts really rock mate! +Rep given!")
Yeah, maybe then it would be okay.
But in my humble opinion (again), this forum is a place to share things with everyone, and not a medium for intensive private messaging. PMing is a nice bonus we have. If we need more, we should be doing that over Skype or email.
- Just MuScLeTeeN's $0.02
7878
BANNED
- Jun 14, 2009
- 1,301
- 8,102
Sorry, only staff are able to send messages and search without being throttled. As stated above, it's a spam counter measure and serves an important purpose.
I'd suggest using an alternative method of communication for you and your customers (assuming the need to send quickly is sales related).
I'd suggest using an alternative method of communication for you and your customers (assuming the need to send quickly is sales related).
LakeForest
Supreme Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 1,268
- 1,816
Would a 15-30 second limit be out of the question for jr vip, or exclusively for jr vip who open a BST? (i don't know if vBulletin could even make this distinction)
BST providers might have to respond to a bunch of PMs, and if they get 60, their minimum wait time to get through them is an hour.
I always wondered what server load in regards to PMs is. I wonder if a forum could be knocked out sending a bunch of PMs with no time limit.
Brainiac101
Newbie
- Jun 15, 2013
- 46
- 22
I think it would be a good idea if the Member has a certain amount of posts x time on forum x Rep count
- Sep 10, 2010
- 11,807
- 26,658
Valid point, I must say. Don't think something is available, but very doable...