Story viewing limiter

Perhaps that is intentional. Perhaps he doesn't want to state that level because then people will feel comfortable going jsut below that rate, which will STILL putting a heavy load on the SQRL database. Perhaps he'd just like readers to slow down without trying to gauge just how much they need to slow down so that they'll stay comfortably below the limit.

I think it's because that limit may have to change without notice. If we get close to the edge, he'll have to dial things back a bit. If he'd said "You can open X per minute" and that has to change then people will be upset. Some will even feel entitled to open X per minute and feel that something is being take away from as he acts to preserve a common resource.

Looking at it that way, he has answered. The limit is set to what the system can take.

Goodgulf

It seems counter productive to me since the way anybody could find out what the limit is is to click rapidly and see how many clicks it takes to hit the limiter. If a lot of people did that it would certainly overload the server.

Don't think that some people won't do that. If they go to the trouble of attempting to re-register to get around the 500 comment rule the same type of people would think nothing of rapidly clicking just to see what they can do to get around the regulations.

Februs has built and maintained a great site here. We all see and enjoy it. He sees from the inside what's happening. I trust him to make the call on what to limit or not limit, and what to disclose or not disclose, all for the betterment of the LSF and its operation. And even if I didn't trust him, it's his site, not mine.

Both Goodgulf and njrick's posts above have it right. It shouldn't be about "how many stories can I get away with flicking" or "what is the limit so i can still flick but just keep under it". The idea is to try and bring about a change in mentality and as far as the limit is concerned if people use the site sensibly they won't hit it. In addition, I never said the limit was static so even if I wanted to answer the question as to what it is (which I don't) there is no single answer.

This site is terrific, we need someone to be in charge and Februs is doing that, I might add very well. This seems to be such a correctable issue. We should be aware of the situation and try to comply with Februs. Thanks.

This speed limit issue is somewhat derisive in that why do we need to know it unless we intend to break it. Limits, speed or otherwise ,temp some people to do the wrong thing in the belief that they are getting something extra, something for free. NEWS HEADLINE, it is all free please use common sense and read what is there properly and not just to add up your scores. I know I do not want to lose the site for any reason that can be avoided.

This is more than overwhelming Februs; I can tell it is a constant source of headaches. I do not envy you this burden.
I wonder how you can make readers comply. Too many behave like children, seeking to thwart your 500 story limit for reading without commenting, deliberately clicking from one story to another even after you've announced the issue. A pity you can't write a program to deliver an electric shock each time they click and click again. Will you close them out the first time they do it? If they have to wait 15 to 20 minutes to reenter the site, some might become believers!
IC

I will freely admit that I've been dinged several times in the last week, mostly for reading a bunch of new snippets that were 100 words or less in rapid succession.

Is it my fault that I'm a speedreader? I suppose I have no recourse but to blame the authors. Damn you and your proliference of creative writing!

If you take the time to comment on each story then you never get hit by the speed trap.

Goodgulf