Can someone PLEASE get rid of this stupid rule about you have to wait 10 seconds before you can vote in a poll.
Its annoying as hell.
If the poll title is IS EVEREST POKER ANY GOOD then what do I have to wait 10 seconds for.. I know what the bloody answer is before I even open the thread...
Secondly, if you post a reply then try to vote, it doesnt register the vote and you then have to wait 10 seconds again before you hit your selection agian, else you get a warning telling you that you are hitting the button too quick and should take time to read the thread or post.. WHICH I HAVE JUST BLOODY DONE.
There was a poll a couple of weeks ago about this and obviously a 10 second rule was what the majority of respondents wanted. The problem was just exactly what your bitchin about, in that too many people were voting on polls without any thought to the question. Maybe it was an easy answer here, but really...is 10 seconds too much to ask for. Mathematically you can still vote 6 times a minute. It's not like your going to solve global warming in 10 seconds.
Joined: Nov '09
Location: United States
Age: 51 (M)
Posts: 142
Posted by psycokiller: There was a poll a couple of weeks ago about this and obviously a 10 second rule was what the majority of respondents wanted. The problem was just exactly what your bitchin about, in that too many people were voting on polls without any thought to the question. Maybe it was an easy answer here, but really...is 10 seconds too much to ask for. Mathematically you can still vote 6 times a minute. It's not like your going to solve global warming in 10 seconds.
Posted by psycokiller: There was a poll a couple of weeks ago about this and obviously a 10 second rule was what the majority of respondents wanted. The problem was just exactly what your bitchin about, in that too many people were voting on polls without any thought to the question. Maybe it was an easy answer here, but really...is 10 seconds too much to ask for. Mathematically you can still vote 6 times a minute. It's not like your going to solve global warming in 10 seconds.
My point was really that the bloody thing doesnt work. You read the question, you post a reply, then you go to vote and it doesnt register your vote. You then have to sit there for 10 seconds and hit the vote button a second time. If you hit it too soon, you then have to wait another 10 seconds.
And no, you are right, you wont solve global warming in 10 seconds. Neither will however it cause the sudden bankruptcy of BRM if that rule were removed.
Perhaps rather than rewarding people for voting needlessly in poills just to gain points ( which incidentally 10 seconds, as you rightly say, isnt going to stop, they can still vote needlessly 6 times in a minutes ). Why not remove the points for voting in polls and say that you only get points if you actually post in the thread itself.
I am sure this 10 second rule does nothing to stop people voting with no idea what the thread is about. Making it essential that they post in the thread means they have to read it first whether they like it or not.
Joined: Nov '09
Location: Poland
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1189
Ye it don't stop people from voting , but they need to w8 10 seconds so they are reading what the poll is about... And u know? That what everybody wanted and that's why the "10sec w8" was made. I think everthing is good like it is now... i always read some post before i vote , post... Then i click vote and just after i post... or just read other thread instead... it's not a race of getting polls isn't it?
Joined: Oct '09
Location: Lithuania
Age: 43 (M)
Posts: 2805
not very stupid because sometimes u can change yours vote if only u vote with the heart not spontanic and only presing button anyway on any answer just must stay cooled brains
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Finland
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1613
The 10 second rule is a good thing ... the main reason was because there were a lot of poll answers but almost no posts in the thread. I really think this have changed after the rule, people are posting and discussing more
Joined: Aug '07
Location: Malta
Age: 41 (M)
Posts: 8320
Now you know how it works - just do it opposite. Read, vote, then reply. Problem solved
It's not THAT often you find polls that will take less than 5-10 seconds to read the question, the answers, the first post and think about your answer.
We could maybe make an option so that people who doesn't want points for voting, will be able to vote instantly. Not sure if it will solve anything though.
Joined: Aug '08
Location: Canada
Age: 58 (F)
Posts: 2558
I like the 10 second rule Now i think it would be great if when creating polls people mixed up the answersa bit so that maybe first one is not the most popular just for points
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Argentina
Age: 45 (M)
Posts: 748
I like the rule...it makes you think and post about your response (I know I used to post ever so little on the polls, now I like to give my rationale for the vote). Now, even if they took away the rule I would still post, but I can't vouch for the rest of the forumers
Joined: Feb '08
Location: Belgium
Age: 64 (M)
Posts: 751
the 10 seconds rule is not that bad at all ... sometimes you don't need to think 10 seconds to give the answer but if waiting 10 seconds let you go on tilt already in a poll than i would like to know how fast you go on tilt on the tables
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by psycokiller: There was a poll a couple of weeks ago about this and obviously a 10 second rule was what the majority of respondents wanted. The problem was just exactly what your bitchin about, in that too many people were voting on polls without any thought to the question. Maybe it was an easy answer here, but really...is 10 seconds too much to ask for. Mathematically you can still vote 6 times a minute. It's not like your going to solve global warming in 10 seconds.
presumably all the people that didn't want to 10sec rule (like me) got bored of waiting and didn't vote.
Posted by Administrator: Now you know how it works - just do it opposite. Read, vote, then reply. Problem solved
It's not THAT often you find polls that will take less than 5-10 seconds to read the question, the answers, the first post and think about your answer.
We could maybe make an option so that people who doesn't want points for voting, will be able to vote instantly. Not sure if it will solve anything though.
As I said earliier, why give people points for voting anyway.. Why not just give points away for those that take the time to reply.
Only those that are active in replying and taking part in discussion should get rewarded ( precisely the point of the points system I beleive ). Anyone can sit here go through the list of polls and make lots of points and never post a single thing. How many people on here have joined up months or even years agao, have gained bankrolls and yet still havent said a single word to anyone. They've just gone through the polls and earned their points that way...
There was a thread the other week that asked why it was only a core number of people who post on the forum, and why didnt more people make the effort. Well the answer is simple. Theres no reason for them to. They only get points for 5 actions a day. If they vote in 5 polls then why bother taking the time to do anything else ?
Take out the points for answering a poll and you'll see the number of responses in threads rise dramatically increasing the level of debate and the quality of hte forum would be far greater.
Doing it that way, makes is irrelevant if they vote within 10 seconds or not, because they wont get rewarded anyway.
Joined: Aug '07
Location: Malta
Age: 41 (M)
Posts: 8320
Posted by fcumred: They only get points for 5 actions a day. If they vote in 5 polls then why bother taking the time to do anything else ?
They don't get points for 5 actions a day. They can get points for 5 posts a day, but you can still get points doing other stuff, including voting (if the poll is rather new).
just must stay cooled brains 
