Timeline for Aren't new users throttled asking questions anymore?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
42 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:38 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 9:34 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ with https://meta.stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Jun 27, 2016 at 16:42 | history | edited | Braiam | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2016 at 21:59 | vote | accept | πάντα ῥεῖ | ||
| May 2, 2016 at 21:55 | answer | added | Shog9StaffMod | timeline score: 40 | |
| May 2, 2016 at 21:32 | history | edited | Shog9StaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| May 2, 2016 at 15:56 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @ThisSuitIsBlackNot THX for backing up. | |
| May 2, 2016 at 15:54 | comment | added | ThisSuitIsBlackNot | Another recent example. | |
| May 2, 2016 at 12:39 | comment | added | Wouter | @AlexanderO'Mara meta.stackoverflow.com/a/259942/1773867 + answer below that | |
| May 1, 2016 at 19:32 | comment | added | Alexander O'Mara | I seem to recall a post about new user rate limiting can be worked around by posting from multiple IP addresses but I can't seem to locate it. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 15:45 | comment | added | gnat | hmm I wouldn't be surprised if broken rate limit helped quite a bit in bootstrapping recent voting ring. Generally the way how SE developers approach the rate limit looks backward to me: network wide default should be like at SO ie 90 minutes (not these senseless 5-10) and only sites that requested it lowered would have lower rate limit than default | |
| May 1, 2016 at 15:26 | history | edited | Jonas Czech | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
The nested quote blocks irked me..
|
| May 1, 2016 at 13:46 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey But I've been observing it. And it wasn't the 1st time recently. That was just a sample I was able to catch, and decided to report here. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:43 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | It just seems unlikely that such a simple rate limiter would be broken, unless someone at SE tripped over a power cord. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:42 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey Well, you're a hard nut to crack :-P ... | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:41 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | Yep, looks like it's broken. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:39 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey I meant complaints on Meta like meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/305683/… or meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/316158/… | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:36 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | What? How do you complain about something that is actually working? | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:36 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey "but have never been confident that it actually works." Well, there's a number of complaints appearing frequently on Meta SO, that seem to improve it actually works. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:33 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | Oh, I see what you're saying. I've heard of the 90 minute rate limit on new users before, but have never been confident that it actually works that way. I assume that rate limiting only comes into play if a pattern of abuse is detected. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:32 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey Sure, but I've seen two questions within 5 minutes (as captured in the screen shot). Why actually? | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:29 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | If the OP was blocked as you described, you wouldn't see two questions appear, you would only see one. You need at least two questions to be asked and heavily downvoted to detect a pattern of abuse. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:28 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey I don't get you? My question is how these two questions could appear within a timespan of 5 minutes, and OP wasn't blocked to ask the latter one? | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:25 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | Within 5 minutes of what? You still need two questions to detect a pattern. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:23 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @RobertHarvey "Is this a person who created a new account because their original account was deleted or suspended? " Within 5 minutes? The questions were both active before deletion. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 13:22 | comment | added | Robert Harvey Mod | Is this a person who created a new account because their original account was deleted or suspended? Because the account @gnat linked to only contains two deleted questions, and I don't see how any system could be crafted to throttle on fewer questions than that. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 12:46 | history | edited | πάντα ῥεῖ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 187 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2016 at 12:30 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @gnat OKI DOKE. (okily dokily) | |
| May 1, 2016 at 12:27 | comment | added | gnat | yes, improves. A while ago I've been using quote formatting for similar effect but someone at MSE convinced me that kbd works better (eg on mobile) | |
| May 1, 2016 at 12:24 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ |
@gnat Why the <kbd></kbd> edit? Does that improve something actually?
|
|
| May 1, 2016 at 12:22 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
formatting kaizen
|
| May 1, 2016 at 12:00 | comment | added | Martin James | @πάνταῥεῖ Not mine, so watch out, there's a troll about.. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 11:22 | history | edited | πάντα ῥεῖ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 101 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2016 at 10:24 | comment | added | Martin James | Oh - someone took down the wards, and the creatures from the lowest levels of hell are breaking through to our dimension:( | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:22 | comment | added | gnat | @Bjørn-RogerKringsjå status by design is 90 minutes rate limit for new users asking questions at Stack Overflow. One thing that could possibly break it is, they recently implemented cross-site posting rate limits - and these new limits use network-wide default (something laughable like 5 or 10 minutes). If done wrong, cross-site limits could override those at Stack Overflow | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:18 | comment | added | Bjørn-Roger Kringsjå | [status-bydesign] | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:12 | history | edited | gnat |
edited tags
|
|
| May 1, 2016 at 10:11 | comment | added | Martin James | @πάνταῥεῖ indeed:( | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:10 | comment | added | πάντα ῥεῖ | @MartinJames I saw you flagged it. But how did the second question make it in at all? | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:09 | comment | added | gnat | since all the garbage they dumped is deleted now, here's user profile to help moderators and SO developers investigate this bug: stackoverflow.com/users/6277410 | |
| May 1, 2016 at 10:07 | comment | added | Martin James | Oh that one. I'm going to have dreams about that poster tonight. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 9:45 | history | asked | πάντα ῥεῖ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |