I get a message:
Sorry, you are only allowed to ask 50 questions in a 30 day period
Why is there a question limit? 50/month is just not enough :)
50/month is just not enough
Actually... 50/month is kinda insane. There are other people trying to use these websites too ya know.
You tend to ask a lot of fairly brief questions. Some of them are pretty good. Some of them are terrible. Some of them have already been asked. And some of them you end up deleting, for reasons I can only guess at.
They all draw time and attention from other users.
That's time that could be spent helping someone else, perhaps even someone who has spent more than a couple minutes thinking about their problem (or searching...) before asking.
SO isn't your personal concierge, and being allowed to ask 50 questions in a month's time is quite generous - but if it is too restrictive for you then I humbly suggest that you are not granting sufficient value to the time and effort put in by others in answering/reviewing these questions. Spend a bit of time searching existing questions (or, y'know, official documentation) first, and ask only when this has proved fruitless.
Who knows? Scarcity just might increase value!
Per balpha's comment:
This limit has only been in existance for a couple of hours. The actual message is "Sorry, you are only allowed to ask 50 questions in a 30 day period"; it's (currently) only active on the trilogy sites. – balpha♦
The reason is the same as most limits that have been built into the system:
Recently Stack Exchange, Inc has been focusing a lot of time and effort on the problem of Low Quality questions. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the undesirable behavior that this limit is meant to help with is the problem of low quality posts.
Chances are good they've found a correlation between the quantity of questions a user posts and the quality of those posts.
Intuitively I find this correlation to be reasonable - If you want to ask 50 questions, but you can only ask 30, chances are good you're only going to ask those questions that are the most important, difficult, or that you feel you'd spend the most time solving yourself.
But the limit is so high that it is not liable to affect many users. Further, the limit is over 30 days, so for instance I could go ahead and ask 30 questions about my current project over a day or two if I had a real roadblock to overcome, but I'm not likely to need to do that too often. This limit is very supportive of the bursty behavior that can happen in programming. Much better than saying you can only ask 2.3 questions per day, which would affect many more people.
In my opinion, there should be more limits like this and limits should be even more restrictive. Many people on Stack Overflow (and other sites) have extraordinary skill sets in different areas and they are so kind to share their knowledge base with others. During the last few weeks I became little bit suspicious that many OPs abuse this by asking question about any problem they hit without even trying to solve it alone.
I think that Stack Overflow and other sites are not consultancy or trainings for free! Because of that I believe that 50 questions per month are too many. I would reduce it to 20-25 with an additional rule which will allow asking more questions if the user also answers questions of another community members. Something like: If you want to ask more, give something back to the community.
I'm a person who asks lots of questions - really, sometimes I ask two questions every day for several days in a row because I go through terra incognita of some new technology (currently Windows Azure) and really need to ask those questions. Even with that it happens to be about 30 questions per month. So while my first reaction was "WTF, that's a too harsh limit", after carefully looking at facts I see that it's not a problem even for me.
Asking questions puts a burden on the site. It is a burden that most site members are willing to bear, because answering them provides a service that benefits the site.
The issues with "more than 50 questions in 30 days" are, 1) should one person be allowed to ask a disproportionate number of questions (and impose a disproportionate burden) on the site and 2) could the site handle a large number of such people?
If you were a "Jon Skeets" who also answered a large number of questions, then you'd be operating at a high level on BOTH sides of the equation. Then we could have a very interesting debate about whether or not it benefits the site to have one person operating at such a high level.
But the record (on Stack Overflow anyway) shows that you ask FAR more than you answer. Under the circumstances, a policy limiting the imbalance seems like a reasonable one.
Maybe it's not a case when talking about Mr Blankman, who rarely answers, but I was kinda shocked when I find out that there is 50 questions limit, while it is encouraged to answer Your own questions. (But I understand why now)
There are new things being developed all the time, in many already invented there are people lacking understanding of many things. What if someone would take up the glove, made some "FAQ's" and exhaustingly answered many of major questions in some topic, greatly explaining how things works, then he find out that his desire to help others gave him nothing but blockade and inability of ask when he is the one who needs help?
Shouldn't such a contribution be, if not honoured, at least not penalized? Maybe if someone answers his own questions and it is favoured by community (like many up-votes in short period of time), they shouldn't count into this 50?
I understand that even such a system can be abused and someone's answers on his own questions can have very low quality. But if we would find a fine way to distinguish one from another, what do you think about this? It can have a future. Wouldn't it be more useful and encouraging for people who would contribute a lot in this way, and also for these who only ask a lot to contribute something more instead? ;)