Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0

If it had been proposed in Proposed New Topics I don't think I would have promoted it. It looks like some nebulous thoughts masquerading as a topic. I'll leave it in Coffee House for now and move it if a focused discussion develops.

Message 1 This could be an interesting discussion.

Has this feature been around for a while and I just missed it?Just wanted to mention that I think this strategy is much better than suspensions/bannings.
Even short-term suspensions just have a whole "I can't do anything!" feeling for the offender. Where a post-per-day limitation leaves them with a level of self-control.So, my question is:(Assuming this is a new feature)
How much of this is you thinking the punishment is appropriate for the crime... and how much of this is "testing out a new feature you just implemented?" As well: Can you adjust the number of posts per day? (2 per day... or 15 per day... or....)
As well well: Can you put an automatic duration on this? (Will last 3 days, then back to normal or will last 1 week, then back to normal...)

I wasn't expecting this question, but glad you asked. It's a new feature, but one I've wanted to implement for a while now. Yesterday I needed another break from my current project, which feels like slogging through mud, and I chose this feature because I thought it might be helpful in moderating the covid thread. It's very relaxing coding in a familiar environment."Posts per day" for any member can be set through the board's control panel to anywhere from 0 to 65535 (2¹⁶ - 1). A setting of 0 means no limit. The software counts how many posts the user has made over the past 24 hours and checks if it is more or less than the post limit. I just realized that member's cannot at present see their post limit setting on their Settings page, and I should fix that. I think I'll make it so that the post limit isn't displayed if it is set to 0, only when it's non-zero.When a user who has hit his post limit hovers over a reply, edit or new topic button they see a hoverbox that tells them they have reached their post limit of x and cannot post again until a specific time. Clicking on the button causes no action.There's no time limit the way there is for suspensions. I thought about it, but then the idea of making the post limit time variable occurred to me, and I'd have to think for a bit about how I'd want that to work. For example, it would be neat to set the daily post limit to go from 1 to 5 over a period of 5 days, after which it would go away.

the tip of the iceberg

There is a need for some rules.The fine-line will be complicated.What are the perimeters of the subject matter, allowed?A JESUS MYTHER thread is, in its extremely limited form, only about whether Jesus existed as a man, or not.But, it must be admitted that is is within the realm of the broader Historical Jesus debate. The discussion will, at times, need to broaden out a bit, and then it is understandable if the discussion necessarily covers certain details about Jesus' disputed life. I suppose so.I don't know if these issues are particularly relevant to a JESUS MYTHER debate, but it might be instructional for me offer some issues that often (or at times) debated in a historical Jesus investigation:Did Jesus ever consider himself a messiah or not?Was Jesus apocalyptic?Was Joseph his biological father or was Pantera ( or another)?Did Jesus have views closer to the Essenes or Parisees? (Questions about other sects come up, also)How often did Jesus leave the Galilee region.What was Jesus' ancestral line?ISSUES RARELY PART OF THE HISTORIAN'S DISCUSSION:The later Christian religionMiraculous storiesSupernatural featsCONCLUSION:The latter three aren't looked at by a historical examination, so far as I know . The discussion of miracles, the supernatural, etc. should be banned from the Jesus Myth thread.

A survey of beliefs among the academic community - in areas such as science, historical studies, degrees, etc. is fine.References to academic studies are fine.Polls and/or studies of views of scientists and scientific studies are fine.If a scientific or historical consensus is an important part of the debate, then the supernatural views and religious beliefs can become part of the topic.

For many of us the term retard is highly offensive. As the parent of a developmentally disabled adult, I have had to deal with that term for many years. I should not have to see it or deal with it on this site. LNA is seemingly not from the US, but has been told before that it is extremely offensive.
LNA refuses to debate in a civil manner and refuses to support any if his claims. All LNA has are strawman arguments and a gish gallop.
When is enough, enough?

I am gone. Someone email when or if LNA is dealt with.

It will happen sooner than you think.

E.g Message 1104Wasn’t that why he was suspended the last time? Who thought it was a good idea to let him back?

I will be back, if LNA is GONE.

LNA may be ruffling a lot of hackles being a scatterbrained Putinnista with no forum social skills, but so what, Tany? You’re not going to fix him. Taking your ball and stomping off only deprives us of your voice. Not good.I tried to engage him but, in my view, he hasn’t the focus nor the intellect to engage. Ignore him.Percy is going to … what? Limit his post count so there is less BS to ignore? Will that change the tone or the intellect behind the limited posts? Probably not. Still would be a good idea. Maybe one per week?IMHO, banning is a no-go. The place to kill bad ideas and correct bad behavior is in the marketplace. You, Tany, along with me and Theo and the whole gang of us here, we are that marketplace.You can’t leave. Not allowed. Not for this lame an excuse.

That's what I have been doing.

Me, too. I've tried engaging with him on more than one occasion, but his responses rarely touch on anything I've said, and it's accompanied by a great deal of nonsense. I finally gave up on him.Everyone has to reach their own limit, but ignoring someone isn't a favored option for some people.--Percy