The current /np restriction is ineffective.

posted
Total Posts
13
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +1
Topic Starter
Hadis
The current /np limitation:
You cannot post a /np of a map two times in a row. It doesn't matter if you try to post it twice in the same chat which would be defenitely considered as spam, or if you try to /np a map to two different people. You have to switch the currently playing map to a different and then back to be able to post it twice.

I certainly don't think that the current limitation is fine since there are defenitely better(not punishing for the average user) ways to prevent spam from /np without increasing the ammount of spam(which I doubt is currently even that relevant).
You could just apply that limitation to public chats(or at least increase the limit to 2-3) since players who are getting /np messages can just tell the other person to stop if they don't want to recieve those messages, and if you don't know the person who is spamming you, you can block them!
The current way of handling it is simply ineffective since the time it takes to post a beatmap into every public channel isn't increased by much and it confuses people who dont know about the limitation.


~Hadis
GhostFrog
Also annoying is the fact that after you link a map, you can't link another map with the same name
Stefan
It's called "spam prevention". Just wait the minute if you urgently need to /np it again for whatever reason.

GhostFrog wrote:

Also annoying is the fact that after you link a map, you can't link another map with the same name
That is more an issue, indeed.
Topic Starter
Hadis
I call it "bad spam prevention".
Also: You dont get what the issue is!
I don't want to /np the map to the same guy twice, that would be nonsensical; I want to give the map to two different people.
That is a easy change with no, or unnoticeable impact on the ammount of spam that comes from /np.
Pasche89
I agree with Hadis.
Stefan
So it shouldn't be limited to the beatmap but the channel? Then this sounds better. Before I forget it I honestly would really consider to have a lower duration when you can /np again BUT to have it limited to one /np.

Example: If I do /np a beatmap, I've got to wait 45 seconds to /np anything again.

They were cases when some randomly /np shittons of maps which is more than annoying.
Gumpy
Didn't even know there were restrictions :/
Topic Starter
Hadis

Stefan wrote:

So it shouldn't be limited to the beatmap but the channel?
Almost. I think it would be better not to change anything about the limitation in public channels.

Stefan wrote:

They were cases when some randomly /np shittons of maps which is more than annoying.
If that happened in a public channel, see above; If that happened in a private chat between 2 people, you can just block the spamming person.
Lanturn
The only issue I have is when I'm trying to link multiple sets of the same song to people. It'd be nice if it was based on SetID. At least through in-game messages to people.
leepdesu
Oh man if the restriction is lifted/duration to /np is shorter than it'll be wayyy easier to give a set of maps to friends instead of inviting them to a multi-player game JUST to download those set of maps.
Sulker
Wait? The restriction actually was set into Private Messages also? Whats the point of even doing that...

If someone is spamming /np in private messages, isn't that what Bancho is for? To stop said user from spamming in general. Even the other user can just report and block him.

Though for public channels in general, I rather we keep the restriction in general. Sorry to users, though it really do prevent spam in general, even though it quite annoying when /np two songs with the same Artsit ID/SongID.
Dostedt
It's only a problem when I send a /np to Tillerino (or some friend) and then I want to send it to a(nother) friend but cant
Topic Starter
Hadis

Dostedt wrote:

It's only a problem when I send a /np to Tillerino (or some friend) and then I want to send it to a(nother) friend but cant
That's a great example!
Please sign in to reply.

New reply