The existence of the 50 questions/month limit is good, as much as I don't like it. It prevents people like me from asking too many questions. :-)

However, a couple of suggestions on improving it:

  • It would be great to have a warning or two sometime before it all ends (say, if we only have 5 questions left), so that we're not suddenly caught off-guard.

  • It would be great to know which 30-day period it's referring to, since it doesn't look like it's the last 30 days (though I may be mistaken). When we can start asking questions again—do I have to wait 1 day or 30 days?

Proposed solution:

Make it be the last 30 days, not "last month". That way, people will know that they can ask at least 1 question tomorrow.

Sounds good?

  • @Adam: I have no idea how many other users run into this limit who don't deserve it. Perhaps it's 50%, perhaps it's 1%, perhaps it's just me, or perhaps it's some others, or perhaps it's no one. I don't come on MSO too often, so I don't have statistics ready for you. I'm just making a suggestion that I know will be helpful for people like me -- however many that may be. – user541686 Jun 28 '11 at 1:43
  • 1
    I understand. I'll clean up my comments since they aren't productive, and since I'm not likely to do the research needed. – Pollyanna Jun 28 '11 at 2:11

If you are getting that close to the limit on a regular basis that you need warnings, or you need to know how long until you can ask again, you really aren't using the site well.

We shouldn't implement features that make it easier to use the site in ways we've already deemed poor usage.

  • @Adam: And you're 100% sure I'm using the site incorrectly and you want to make me suffer through not knowing when I can use it again? – user541686 Jun 27 '11 at 21:43
  • @Mehrdad I'm not saying anything personally about you. The site itself is saying that you're using it incorrectly by posting too many questions. If you believe you are using the site correctly, but you are frequently hitting the limit, then you should ask a new question explaining how stack overflow's limit is wrong via your example. If you are using the site 100% correctly and you hit the limit, then the limit is, by definition, wrong. If that's the case, then you shouldn't have a problem convincing others of your correctness. – Pollyanna Jun 27 '11 at 21:51
  • 6
    Hmmm... I think you may be on to something here. I'd hate to see people trying to cram three questions into one because they know they're running out. Maybe cutting them off without warning isn't such a bad thing. – Bill the Lizard Jun 27 '11 at 21:54
  • @Bill: At least say how many days are left, even if you don't want to give a warning. Not knowing anything is the worst thing here -- even people who are under timed suspension often know when it's going to be over! – user541686 Jun 27 '11 at 22:00
  • @Bill: If you warn people, they could actually avoid posting a question at all, if they realize they've posted too many questions (hint, hint: me). Your conclusion that they'll cram posts together isn't always correct (certainly isn't correct in my case). – user541686 Jun 27 '11 at 22:05
  • 2
    @Mehrdad: No, I don't think it would always be the case at all. Also, saying how many days are left doesn't seem like it could be abused in any way, so I'm all for it. – Bill the Lizard Jun 27 '11 at 22:18

You could let people pay rep to ask more questions.

That way those that have gained crazy rep from asking questions, will have to spend it back down.

  • Do not like! I like that a hard limit makes users use their own noggins for a brief period of time. This is a valuable period in the life of a novice, let's not think of ways to circumvent it. However, make the price high enough, say... 10000 rep per question... – Anthony Pegram Jun 27 '11 at 20:22
  • 5
    I think you could query the data dump to see how much reputation people typically earn when they ask 50 questions per month to find a reasonable amount to charge for more questions. – Bill the Lizard Jun 27 '11 at 20:26
  • 3
    @Bill Once the average is found, they should have to pay at least an order of magnitude more - they should be paying for questions with answer rep. – Pollyanna Jun 27 '11 at 21:17
  • 1
    @Adam/@Bill: or 1 non-self-accepted answer equals 1 question above the 50 limit. – user7116 Jun 27 '11 at 21:20
  • @Adam: I don't think anyone would use it then. I might be willing to pay out some rep if I thought there was a good chance I'd earn half of it back, but not if I only stood to earn back 10% (plus an answer, of course). Would a lower cost be more acceptable if that rep were put towards an immediate bounty? – Bill the Lizard Jun 27 '11 at 21:48
  • 4
    @Bill I think it's important to put this in perspective. We are already swimming in questions. Someone who hits the limit is submitting 10 or 100 times more questions than the average user. Giving them the ability to ask more questions beyond the established limits - which are exceptionally generous as-is - should hurt. They should pick and choose which questions to ask, and which to research themselves, rather than using Stack Overflow for every little query. – Pollyanna Jun 27 '11 at 21:55
  • Regarding this idea: If we go with this, I think around ~20-25 rep might make sense -- it's the equivalent of 4-5 upvotes, and a question with that many upvotes has a relatively high probably of being a good question. – user541686 Jul 1 '11 at 23:02
  • I would only upvote this if I knew that the number of points was to be 50 or more I.e. In line with the bounty minimum, and perhaps doubling with each extra question over 50 that is asked in the 30 day period. – PolyGeo Nov 26 '15 at 21:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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