Double Posting

[Mint]

I've just been warned for double posting and it's made me realise how annoying the rule can be. Obviously most people that double post don't do it on purpose so when you get punished for it you are not happy. Does anyone think that this rule should be watered down a little bit so if people are clearly double posting on purpose they should be punished or if it's obvious that the double poster didn't mean to double post then they can get a way with maybe just a reminder PM?

[kk.]

well, i know if its a popular thread which gets posts very often, you do a quick reply and then someone else has posted that you want to reply to, you have to quote, copy, press back, refresh, edit, paste, save. When you could just quote, comment, post. It needs to be relaxed a bit i think. or as you said, a reminder pm or in ur post

[Charlie]

If it's accidentally then fair enough, I don't think you should receive a warning because it isn't your fault and could be due to lag or something. But if you purposely do it (not to add information to a previous post after your edit time has run out) then a warning should be issued.

[scottish]

Its almost impossible to tell if someone does it accidently or purposely?

I could post this then post again responding to someone elses post and edit and say "oops never meant to double post" and i get +1 post and even though i've done it purposely the mods could think it was an accident?

Only double posts that shouldn't receive a warning is ones out of the editable time and its adding information (and ofc the other exceptions such as spam where post count doesn't increase) and ones due to forum lag.

Vampirism; if a member double posts due to forum lag it'll be a replica of the previous post so they just get merged usually and user won't be infracted/warned as its not their fault.

[Mint]

Its almost impossible to tell if someone does it accidently or purposely?

I could post this then post again responding to someone elses post and edit and say "oops never meant to double post" and i get +1 post and even though i've done it purposely the mods could think it was an accident?

Only double posts that shouldn't receive a warning is ones out of the editable time and its adding information (and ofc the other exceptions such as spam where post count doesn't increase) and ones due to forum lag.

Vampirism; if a member double posts due to forum lag it'll be a replica of the previous post so they just get merged usually and user won't be infracted/warned as its not their fault.

I'm sure our Mod's will be able to tell the difference between someone double posting on purpose and someone who did not mean to do it. And besides, if a user keeps on double posting then it's obvious that they are doing it on purpose.

[scottish]

I could do it once per 20 posts purposely saying oops meant to edit? mod would have absolutely no idea that i'm purposely doing it. Mods aren't some kinda of superhuman who can tell what the user was meant to do.

[ReviewDude]

If you double-post due to lag (though, I don't know how that's possible with flood control), then I doubt any decent Moderator would warn you for it. However, anything else can't ever really be much more than thread-bumping, so might deserve it...

[bo$$]

I could do it once per 20 posts purposely saying oops meant to edit? mod would have absolutely no idea that i'm purposely doing it. Mods aren't some kinda of superhuman who can tell what the user was meant to do.

if you accidently double post (like due to lag or something) then the posts would be identical :S unless you edit the second one saying "oops i didnt mean to double post" and thats when that post is removed...

[Robbie]

I could do it once per 20 posts purposely saying oops meant to edit? mod would have absolutely no idea that i'm purposely doing it. Mods aren't some kinda of superhuman who can tell what the user was meant to do.

Check edit history.

[The Professor]

I could do it once per 20 posts purposely saying oops meant to edit? mod would have absolutely no idea that i'm purposely doing it. Mods aren't some kinda of superhuman who can tell what the user was meant to do.

If someone was doing that I'm sure the mod would be smart enough to make the connection