buffer-overflowed's Journal: Slow Down Cowboy!

This is new! Presented for your enjoyment, a bug:

Slashdot requires you to wait 2 minutes between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 8 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.

Screenshot.

[Talinom]

Did you get a screenshot of the goodness? Does CmdrTaco accept attachments?

Re:Screenshot.

[Red Warrior]

A couple of people have mentioned this over the last few days. I've gotten the same thing on about 50% of my posts today. The longest was 28 minutes.

Re:Screenshot.

[Some Woman]

I win. :^) (Oh...wait...that's not a good thing.) My longest was 29 minutes. I was able to post in the 30th minute. A lot of people have reported a 30 minute wait today. Yesterday the wait was 15 minutes.

Oddly, I only have the problem at work.

Re:Screenshot.

[buffer-overflowed]

Yea, it seems to happen only when you reply to a reply or try to reply to the same comment twice w/o any intervening comments.

But not all the time. Second time it's happened to me within the past few days.

Ah well. Wouldn't be slashdot if it worked perfectly.

nice

[nocomment]

very nice

I don't know why this site is so popular, it has GOT to be one of the worst designed sites I've ever seen.

Re:nice

[peacefinder]

"I don't know why this site is so popular, it has GOT to be one of the worst designed sites I've ever seen."

What in particular is so heinous? I'm not trying to start a flamewar, I'm really curious.

IMO, the underlying concept is good, but there are some amusingly... ummm... sub-optimal executions. Sorta like EpIII. :-)

Re:nice

[ceejayoz]

What in particular is so heinous?

Well, for starters, the HTML is atrocious.

The biggest wtf?! thing is that they seem to use their production site for bug testing - glaring, exceedingly obvious bugs show up on Slashdot.org when they should have easily been handled on a development server.

Add in random code 500 errors, editors who don't edit, etc. and the only thing keeping me around is the journals scene.

Re:nice

[loucura!]

The 500 errors are actually generated by a load-balancing software called Pound. If a page takes longer than the client timeout value in the configuration, pound returns a 500 error. We used to run pound, but it couldn't handle our traffic on the machine we had. They've over-complicated things by having pound running on five of their webservers.

Re:nice

[arb]

The biggest wtf?! thing is that they seem to use their production site for bug testing - glaring, exceedingly obvious bugs show up on Slashdot.org when they should have easily been handled on a development server.

No, no, no. You've got it all wrong. This is the Bug Production Server. It's where they create the bugs to insert into Slashcode for other Slash-based sites to enjoy.

Re:nice

[ces]

I think it has something to do with all of the crack the 'programmers' smoke.

Actually in slashdot's defense, I'll say I prefer slashdot style comments to the way most webboards, blogs, or livejournal handle them.

Also for all it's flaws the moderation system here is the most likely of the sites I've visited to actually bubble up the better comments to the top in long threads. The system Scoop uses isn't bad in principle but people tend to complain loudly when they are given anything less than the top ratin

Re:nice

[artifex2004]

I don't know why this site is so popular, it has GOT to be one of the worst designed sites I've ever seen.

Sure, if you were to design one today. /. was created several years ago, however, and was pretty cutting edge when it first came out.

"It's ugly, but it's ours."

Fixed

[jamie]

Fixed as of last night. :)