Quote Originally Posted by Flambard D'Quinceteth View Post
As with quote pyramids, it's simply a matter of making the forums look tidy. One person multi-posting everywhere looks messy as anything, though I'm on the same page as you in that the occasional double post that adds to the an otherwise slow/dead conversation is fine. In fact, I'd say most of the staff are on this page. With regards to the rule itself, and how it's written, I figure it's much simpler to outright ban something and use common sense on a case by case basis rather than to have a lenient rule to begin with. This way, if someone starts taking the piss with it all, you're more justified in punishing them more severely.
Do you think this would really be a problem? I think the current way quote pyramids are handled is entirely analogous, and works just fine with a more vague "don't abuse them" rule.

Quote Originally Posted by Shorty
I think it may also help with reducing the need to spam in order to boost post count.
What is this, 2002???? No one cares about post counts anymore. It's all about join date rep points now.

I agree that Jiro is a spam whore. But he is an entertaining spam whore who livens up our days.

Quote Originally Posted by Gobo
Seeing the same avatar and signature is ugly, and it slows the loading of a page.
1. Not as ugly as your face.

2. How the hell does 2 posts by Raistlin slow the loading of a page any more than 1 post by Raistlin and 1 post by Shorty? The latter would obviously slow loading down way more, because of Shorty's gigantic-... uh, beauty. Yeah, that.

Quote Originally Posted by Vivi
Pretty much this. The reason to have a rule like no double posts as opposed to don't be annoying is pretty straight forward: the former is this wishy washy, nebulous thing which exists but is pretty much impossible to objectively define in a hard and fast way. Someone might find a bit of a spam post annoying. Someone else may find it funny and perfectly fine. Same for double posts. So instead of saying don't be annoying, and force the staff to basically debate what is and isn't an annoying use of double posts, we've got the hard and fast, easy to define rule of don't double post. And everyone can see when a double post happens.
I disagree that such "hard and fast" rules are so useful or even desirable. I also disagree that a lack of those rules would cause any problems. The staff already says "don't be annoying" or "don't be rude to other members" or "don't talk about how Shlup's ass got stuck in the door that one time," or other similarly vague instructions, and while I personally just ignore everything they say, most of the rest of the members seem to have no trouble following along.

Quote Originally Posted by Sephex
I always thought that it is okay to do once in awhile, but if a user does it frequently, then they should learn to use the edit button.
Quote Originally Posted by Bleys
Methinks it's a case of employing the UYFB rule. If it's a spam double-post, warn. If there's any logical reason whatsoever, do nothing.
This is basically the dramatic rule change I am talking about, right here. Any given double post that includes its own substantive content (so that it isn't just spam or duplicative) doesn't need to be a problem.