So, a couple years ago David set up the code on the site to not allow people to reply to a thread after a certain number of repeated replies. Details of that are in the link below.

https://www.vizzed.com/boards/thread.php?id=80851

The reason I bring this up is because this code is the standard for how many replies are allowed, by the site itself, to a thread before you need to wait for a new person to reply.

However, this seems to not be the end of people obsessing over this "rule". I am constantly seeing people either apologizing for "sandwich posting" or talking about how they didn't reply somewhere because they didn't want to sandwich post. Someone during this TdV got DQ'd because of "sandwich posting" which as I'm about to tell you, IS NOT AGAINST THE RULES! Simply put, you can't break this rule because the site doesn't allow you to break the rule. Just like how there are time limits on how quickly RGR actions can be done while getting credit for them the site prevents people from replying too many times. The site code IS the rule.

No longer is "sandwich posting" against the rules. It hasn't been for several years but apparently people didn't get the memo. I'm making it as clear as I can again because it seems to have been forgotten or ignored. Sandwich posting will not be punished and is not in and of itself considered "spam". There -might- be a sandwich posting rule relating to the blue jersey in future TdV's but until then this rule should stand as is.

If you have questions feel free to ask them here.

Sorry for sandwich posting.

I think this is fantastic. So many people have a horrid misunderstanding of just what is sandwich posting and why there's a rule against it.

I guess even fewer knew we figured this out forever ago.

¯_(?)_/¯ : Someone should have told the mods during the June 2013 TdV

legacyme3 : I fully intend to clarify that for the staff next There are very rare instances where I would punish someone for "sandwich posting".

tgags123 : David "fixed" the rule in 2014 so it wouldn't have really applied properly then.

I really do take advantage of that limit. 

People keep saying it's against the rules, and it's gotten pretty annoying for me to have to deal with. 

I don't feel there should be a rule in the future, the site code is the rule, so take advantage. There isn't any problem with that. 

Barathemos : I agree. I never said there would be a rule but there -might- be because people can't stand when someone outposts them....

I had no idea this even existed. Thank you for pointing this out. It clears up a lot of things.

The only thing I'm curious about here is in the thread you linked it says Staff+ have no limit on how many times they can actually post back to back. So does that mean Staff have no restrictions on how many times it's acceptable to do so? Or was this changed at some point to where it does apply to Staff?

Mynamescox44 : it's hard to tell sometimes. When David says "staff" (especially 2 years ago) it might have meant mods and it might have meant site staff and up.

Regardless of the power level though staff are all expected to conduct themselves in an upstanding way. Any suggestion to the contrary could result in..... DEATH!

mmmmmm....sandwiches. Wait, what are we talking about?

Oh yeah! Sandwich posting. I...actually didn't realize this rule change. Go figure! This is fantastic to know! Now I don't have to stress over it anymore Thank you SO much for this post.

Mynamescox44 : There are limits to staff+ as well, just that our limit is absurdly high. I recently lost access to my staff role thread because I reached this limit of sandwich posting between me and tRIUNE, but only after the thread had reached 10 pages at 20 posts per page (and with very few people besides me and tRIUNE replying). Don't know if each power level in staff+ has its own limit, though.

geeogree : Just wanting to clarify, for the above issue I've mentioned: how many users or replies does a thread need before it "unlocks" itself and resets your limit? 

Thanks for the clarification and sorry for sandwich posting.

Linkums : The sad thing is, that sandwich got farther in the game than I ever did.

EX Palen : I think it requires 1 different person from the 2 that were posting for the limit to reset but I've never fully tested it because the limit is so high most of the time.

Plus, I have no limit being an admin.

Honestly though, the vast majority of the time the limit shouldn't be an issue if the thread is remotely active/interesting to at least 3 people.

Also, when it is your own thread the limit is 3 times higher than normal.

Linkums : that was interesting.

supernerd117 : your post is part of what I'm talking about. "Now I don't have to stress over it anymore Thank you SO much for this post." Did you actually ever stress about it?

geeogree : Okay, looks like we'll need to test that out. I'll try to get somebody to post there and see when does the limit reset for me.

I was aware that the limit was higher in your own threads, but 3 times is just too much. I managed 60-70 sandwich posts in a thread not made by me, so 3 times that amount is a very high number, almost like if there was no limit.

EX Palen : I know the limit exists for Vizzed Elite and lower because I've seen people hit it. It is possible that Site Staff+ don't have the limit at all.

In the case of Site Staff and up I expect people to use common sense with how often they reply to threads. Replying 3 or 4 times and then waiting for a few people to reply is generally what I do even though I could reply to everyone right away. Depends on the thread though. I've got some threads where I've replied 5-10 times in a row because no one else replies but I want to keep talking about the topic and new stuff has happened (like TV shows for example). Should I stop posting because no one else is posting but I want to keep talking? Maybe, maybe not. However, quite often my latest reply gets some traction and I get 10 posts from other people into that thread over a few days.

I just see no reason to be discouraging posting as long as people aren't spamming or trolling in threads.

I am glad the rule is clear now. I remember talking about it some time ago, but since there are integrated mechanisms I guess it keeps abuses away.

geeogree : Yeah. A LOT sometimes. Not very much recently (since the addition of back-to-back posts in the same thread, I've loosened up a good bit), but it has tended to be on my mind.

I only saw this thread AFTER making this post: https://www.vizzed.com/boards/thread.php?id=3694&pl=1287565

I cannot.

And I've been here since before the code was removed.

LOL.

Thanks for the info though, a good read at that.

Emoteen134

emoteen134 : then the new rules don't apply to you.... prepare to be banned forever!!!!!!!

Linkums : That post made me want to play Pokémon Red and eat a PB&J....

EX Palen : I can bump your thread then, if you like. I can't ignore the words, though... I don't have mod powers in the staff forum.