This question already has an answer here:

People like myself are Stack Exchange trusted users with thousands of reputation points and hundreds of badges. In other words, we've proven ourselves as people who are assets to Stack Exchange and are a key component in making it so profitable.

As such, I was surprised when I posted a question on the User Experience meta site, and then shortly afterwards tried to report a bug on that same meta site, but was blocked with a message in red stating I had to wait 40 minutes before posting again.

Why is this limit present for trusted Stack Exchange contributors, and can it be changed?

marked as duplicate by gnat, rene, Nathan Tuggy, Glorfindel, SPArchaeologist Sep 19 '16 at 18:30

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    By the way, finding the intended behavior will let us know it is a bug (or "bugged"... LOL) or a feature. If it's a bug, perhaps it can get fixed. If it's a feature, perhaps we can work to improve the feature! :-) – RockPaperLizard May 21 '16 at 21:42
  • 1
    You have less than 125 rep on User Experience. – Robert Longson May 21 '16 at 21:47
  • @RobertLongson Yes, which is a bit ironic given my area of professional expertise. I just gave it a test, and son of a gun, you're right. It's surprising that I've never run into this issue before. – RockPaperLizard May 21 '16 at 21:57
  • 1
    BTW, I found the text that confused me. The Complete Rate Limiting Guide states "Users < 125 rep, 40 minutes, network-wide". The words "network-wide" apparently applies to the limitation, not the reputation. Maybe we can work on the wording over at UX. ;-) – RockPaperLizard May 21 '16 at 22:41
  • 1
    Related answer on MSO – Taryn May 22 '16 at 17:21

Robert Longson provided documentation revealing that this limitation is intentional and not a bug. Many thanks to Mr. Longson!

So let's look at this limitation and decide if we still want it.

For users who are new to Stack Exchange, it makes sense to impose reasonable limits. After all, we don't want spam, and we don't want community moderators to be overtaxed having to deal with a bunch of off topic questions.

But for dedicated Stack Exchange contributors, what's the harm in allowing us to ask a question on History SE and then an unrelated one 10 minutes later on Mythology SE?

Actually, let's look at it the other way. What's the benefit? The benefit is more quality questions from experienced Stack Exchange contributors. That's a win-win for Stack Exchange and the contributors!

  • 4
    AFAIK, the only place rep crosses between sites is in Chat... You have to earn your privs on every site if you want to use that site's full features... you're not a trusted user there if you don't have rep on that site. You're essentially asking for a change to the entire concept of this network. – Catija May 21 '16 at 22:54
  • "Still" want it? Since it was added in the last few months, I'd say so! – Nathan Tuggy May 21 '16 at 23:28
  • 1
    @Catija That's not true: if you have 200 rep on one site, then you get a 100 rep bonus on every site. This bonus overcomes most newcomer restrictions, including some of the rate limits, but for some reason not this particular rate limit. – Gilles May 21 '16 at 23:41
  • @Gilles that rep has limitations. It's not real rep. And it's not carte blanche... 100 rep does very little in the grand scheme of things. – Catija May 21 '16 at 23:43
  • 1
    Why not? Because you don't know their on topic off topic rules, you've not searched for duplicates (and won't have experience of previous questions)... – Tim May 22 '16 at 2:25
  • @Tim Huh? So they shouldn't be allowed to post at all? This about allowing experienced and trusted SE contributors to post on one SE site, and then still allowing them to post on a completely different SE site within 40 minutes (when they have under 125 rep on each of those sites). I think perhaps you misread the answer. – RockPaperLizard May 22 '16 at 3:04
  • 1
    The main reason there are network limits is to prevent spammers creating multiple accounts and then posting cross-network spam. A few spammers have been patient enough to get rep on one site (probably via voting rings) so they get a network bonus and then spam all sites. – Robert Longson May 22 '16 at 6:57
  • @RobertLongson That makes good sense. Consequently, the need to require an appropriately high level of trust. Something like 2000 total combined reputation points on all SE sites on which the user has at least 250 points. That will separate the wheat from the chaff. – RockPaperLizard May 22 '16 at 8:23
  • @RockPaperLizard I read it. My point is if you are posting within 40 minutes you've not researched enough. – Tim May 22 '16 at 12:55
  • @Tim SE is designed better than to require 40 minutes to read what is on topic, get a quick sense of the site, and perform a search to make sure the same question has not already been asked. If SE really wanted experienced contributors (or anyone for that matter) to spend 40 minutes on a site before posting, then they would prevent people from posting for the first 40 minutes after signing up for any SE site. – RockPaperLizard May 23 '16 at 0:41
  • Some frequent contributors go online to perform research, write their thorough questions offline, and then want to re-connect to the internet to post different questions on a few SE sites at once. What I do now, is when I can't post a question due to the 40 minute restriction, I just post my questions on sites outside of the StackExchange network instead of on the StackExchange network. – RockPaperLizard May 23 '16 at 0:42

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .